Hate Crime bill passes, Christians on red alert

Originally Posted by Play The Man

You may not need the Bible to tell you right from wrong; as you admit, you have a personal moral code and you are not able to live up to it, let alone God's commandments. The Bible is a storybook about a rescue. God chases us down with his goodness and mercy. Ultimately, he came to earth disguised as a poor baby and served as a passover lamb to cover the sins of those who have faith in him. Everyone will be judged in the end. Christians will have Jesus as an advocate and our sins will be paid for by his blood. Those without Jesus will have to speak for themselves and accept their own punishment. If you don't believe that God will judge sin, then Jesus has nothing to offer you.

i didn't say i couldn't live up to my own personal moral code,i think once you really got to know me you would see i do that quite well...what i did say was i cant live up to Gods commandments as you put it...not that i know that for a certainty because to tell you the truth i really dont think i could list all the commandments so there for i dont know if i am living up to them or not.

i have never said i dont think God will judge sin,i know he will and i know i will be judged,God will judge me and if her deems it as a appropriate response to cast me in to hell for my sins then so be it....i know i wont be alone.

[Play The Man]

I think we will keep talking past each other because we aren't using the same definition for terms like "happiness" and "peace". Chris F is using the term "true happiness" and his definition includes living a life that takes into account the commandments of God. I think most people in modern day America (and Canada) would define it as being in a state of material comfort, freedom, health, friendship, accomplishment, and erotic fulfillment. These can be great things. I would argue that in many cases, the Christian life is less happy (using the aforementioned definition). As a Christian, you may be called to a life of poverty, imprisonment, suffering, loneliness, low station in life, and celibacy. Most people are not "happy" under those circumstances. I certainly don't want to live a life of difficulty. The problem is, you may be put in a situation where doing the right thing means that you have to accept one, or all, of the difficult things I mentioned. The scary thing is that in many cases, the person that is the most righteous, has the most difficult (and least "happy"?) life.

Originally Posted by Play The Man

I think we will keep talking past each other because we aren't using the same definition for terms like "happiness" and "peace". Chris F is using the term "true happiness" and his definition includes living a life that takes into account the commandments of God. I think most people in modern day America (and Canada) would define it as being in a state of material comfort, freedom, health, friendship, accomplishment, and erotic fulfillment. These can be great things. I would argue that in many cases, the Christian life is less happy (using the aforementioned definition). As a Christian, you may be called to a life of poverty, imprisonment, suffering, loneliness, low station in life, and celibacy. Most people are not "happy" under those circumstances. I certainly don't want to live a life of difficulty. The problem is, you may be put in a situation where doing the right thing means that you have to accept one, or all, of the difficult things I mentioned. The scary thing is that in many cases, the person that is the most righteous, has the most difficult (and least "happy"?) life.

well i have experienced 4 of the six that you have stated there and while i wasn't happy with the situations i found myself in i was never unhappy,
i already understand what you and some others say is the definition of true happiness and while i DO agree with you i also think you can be very happy on earth if you just put some effort in... it really is not so unattainable.

i for one have never looked to material things for happiness even though i do like nice things like everybody else if you took them away from me tomorrow it wouldn't affect my happiness as a person but it would affect my comfort level for a few days...two different things in my eyes.
some of the best times in my life is when i had nothing and i actually learned a very valuable lesson from that and took that forward with me in life.

Forgive me for re-opening the thread topic 9 pages in, and I 'm not entirely caught up on the discussion.

My co-teacher for Tuesday nights (Bible Study) is an older gentleman who has time to read up on these questionable bills, etc, and read the real text of the things. His comment on the Hate-Crime provisions in the appropriations bill (it was a rider on an appropriations bill, in the end) was that a physical crime or an action must be attached to the "hate" portion. While this moves us closer to the thought police issues, we're not exactly at the position of prosecution for thought alone. We're about 1 step from it, though. That precedent could be set in a court, however,...with their rule of "interpretations."

[Play The Man]

Originally Posted by bradwright

well i have experienced 4 of the six that you have stated there and while i wasn't happy with the situations i found myself in i was never unhappy,
i already understand what you and some others say is the definition of true happiness and while i DO agree with you i also think you can be very happy on earth if you just put some effort in... it really is not so unattainable.

i for one have never looked to material things for happiness even though i do like nice things like everybody else if you took them away from me tomorrow it wouldn't affect my happiness as a person but it would affect my comfort level for a few days...two different things in my eyes.
some of the best times in my life is when i had nothing and i actually learned a very valuable lesson from that and took that forward with me in life.

Good points.

Originally Posted by Conrad

Forgive me for re-opening the thread topic 9 pages in, and I 'm not entirely caught up on the discussion.

My co-teacher for Tuesday nights (Bible Study) is an older gentleman who has time to read up on these questionable bills, etc, and read the real text of the things. His comment on the Hate-Crime provisions in the appropriations bill (it was a rider on an appropriations bill, in the end) was that a physical crime or an action must be attached to the "hate" portion. While this moves us closer to the thought police issues, we're not exactly at the position of prosecution for thought alone. We're about 1 step from it, though. That precedent could be set in a court, however,...with their rule of "interpretations."

Precedence has already been set with some state laws that are similar. As of yet however their respective supreme courts have shot them down as unconstitutional, but I am not so sure the SCOTUS would do the same. This is why it was a bad move and thew fact the attached it to a spending bill is even more egregious.

Originally Posted by Play The Man

Good points.

i dont even know how to respond to that...and now that i think about it a bit i think that was your intention.
so i will just say thanks and drop it i guess.

until we meet again then.