Catholics back Muslim claims against evangelical Christians

That has got to be the worst-written news story in history. Having read it I have absolutely no idea what exactly was done by who to whom.

I do think it's ridiculous for any religious group to support anti-vilification laws, because they themselves, their own free speech, are the most likely targets of such laws.

 

I agree. But it sure does make for a great anti-Catholic post, doesn't it. Some "bible-believing" people need to get a life. By the way, I just got back from church, where we read from the book of Luke, 1 Peter, Psalms and Acts, in the Holy Bible. It was a Catholic mass. Please try not to be an ignorant hick and imply that Catholics aren't "Bible-believing."

-Michael

 

I oppose any anti-villification, hate-speech legistlation as it is an assault on free speech. I don't care if it is Baptists, Catholics, Jews, Muslims, or whoever being villified.

Joseph Botwinick

 

ON the contrary;
Having read the article and related links, I am fully sure of what happened. Two evangelicals preached against the tenets of Islam at a seminar, in published articles and on their web-site. Some muslims who were present at the seminar were offended. They took advantage of a law in Australia which prohibits "vilification" of any group of people. The muslims argued that the Christians did indeed do this. The christians argued that they only presented Islam in the light of its own writings.
The judge agreed with the muslims. So did Catholics, Anglicans, and the Uniting church. (whatever that is?)
Bottom line? Christians are the target for censurship. And the laws world-wide are progressively promoting this censurship in the name of tolerance.

EVEN SO, COME, LORD JESUS.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

My comments were directed specifically at the news story. Yes, the links provide the full story, including the actual judgement. Regardless, the news story itself was horribly done.

One question -- are we supposed to approve of evangelical Christians vilifying Islam? Never mind about the law itself, which we have already commented on. Speak to the charity of evangelical Christians vilifying Islam.

 

I personally think that telling untruths about others for the purpose of villifying them is wrong. But, I still stand behind their free speech rights to do so.

Joseph Botwinick

 

Are we supposed to accept baseless charges against Christians without some kind of "Evidence".. or is the "Evidence" that they are "Bible believing" enough to condemn them outright as bigots!??

The point is made in the article that the RCC has in the passed been villified (I assume they mean that evil actions were assigned or attributed to the RCC which were never actually comitted by them -- but the article does not give any details there either)..

But in this case it is the mind-numbing
"seriousness of the charge - not the nature of the evidence" that is supposed to sway the loyal readership.

How "unnexpected".

In Christ,

Bob

 

We can shake on that.

 

Please try not to be an ignorant hick

-Michael </font>[/QUOTE]

1 Corinthians 1:20-25