Legislation alert

Thanks for the good news. Be a big improvement if churches were forced to preach "Christ and him crucified" instead of politics and social garbage.

 

Why do you keep trying to propogate this lie? This bill does not do that. It's a bad bill on many other levels, but it does not do what you say.

Oh btw, it's best to just ignore billwald...he's just a troll looking to get a rise out of people.

 

Let's keep in mind that this comes from a poster who calls the Biblical account of creation "a myth," and made a statement along the lines of, "If God were truly an intelligent designer, He would have..."

Also, an elementary tenet of the Gospel is showing man's need for a Savior. Pointing out sin is indeed on the pastor's plate. Not legalism, but sin. I'm not sure why a pastor's pointing out sin is problematic for you...

oh well.

 

Billwald is a pastor!!!

I thought he was a soul searching for truth... hmmm...

 

Three days ago, on April 27, I started a thread called Hate Crimes Bill on this very topic here:
http://baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=59152

I posted this:

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/D...aspx?id=494798

One person I know had this assessment:
"Once it becomes law (and it will even if it isn't this time) pastors and other evangelical leaders could be charged and fined or imprisoned if they preach against homosexuality and something happens to a homosexual which could possibly be tied to what the pastor taught."

I asked if anyone knew if it had passed or had more info. There were only 5 comments.

The person starting this thread should have posted info on my thread and not started a new one.

 

==That (in bold) is not true and the really sad part is that you know it is not true. You have read the bill and therefore you know it talks only about physical violence. It says nothing about "warning" or "speech" in any way shape and or form. So why do you continue to say that this bill does something that it does not? :BangHead:

 

This is from today's bulletin from Kerby Anderson:

The bill passed the House yesterday by a vote of 249-175 and now goes to the Senate.

A "hate crime" if it has the possibility of being able to be broadly interpreted, could be tied to speech, imo.


[/FONT]

 

==Nobody can or will deny that the government will go to great lengths to deny Americans our constitutional rights. For example, thanks to the Patriot Act signed by Republican President George W Bush, a 16 year old North Carolina child now sits in an out of state prison with no lawyer and very limited contact with his parents. Instead of being provided with due process, the feds stormed the family's home and took the child away (see my blog). So I certainly understand your fear about this bill. However the bill only deals with physical violence, not speech. The claim that this bill criminalizes the preaching against homosexuality is simply not factually true. It does no good to claim things about this bill that are not true. I'm more concerned about the Patriot Act since it allows federal agents to arrest an American citizen and hold them without due process.

 

==I've seen no "Bush bashing" in this thread. Maybe you should point out the alleged "Bush bashing" just as you should point out how the bill being discussed here violates your freedoms.

 

Martin, would you not agree, however, that "hate crime legislation," in light of the points I brought up earlier (post 20 of this thread), is bad law?

 

Posted by Jedi Knight on another thread:

http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?id=30388&ref=BPNews-RSSFeed0429


Foes: Gay hate crimes bill could target churches


Posted on Apr 29, 2009 | by Tom Strode
WASHINGTON (BP)--Legislation to extend hate crimes protections to homosexuals and transgendered individuals could severely restrict religious freedom, foes of the proposal said April 28 as they sought to rally opposition.

Members of the House of Representatives and leaders of evangelical Christian and conservative organizations, including the Southern Baptist Convention's ethics entity, warned about the bill's impact at a Capitol Hill news conference on the eve of the measure's consideration in the House. The Democratic leadership was expected to bring the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act, H.R. 1913, to the House floor April 29.

The measure would add "sexual orientation" and "gender identity" to the current classes -- including race, religion and national origin -- protected from hate crimes. "Sexual orientation" includes homosexuality, while "gender identity," or transgendered status, takes in transsexuals and cross-dressers.

"This bill puts Christians and many other religious groups in the government's crosshairs," Barrett Duke said at the news conference. Duke is vice president for public policy and research of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

"While we should never condone acts of violence against anyone, for whatever reason, including whether or not that person is a homosexual, this bill proposes to prosecute someone based on their belief about homosexuality and therefore makes religious belief a germane issue in this debate," Duke said. "Anyone who holds a religiously based belief about homosexuality is immediately suspect of engaging in a hate crime if a homosexual is involved, even if the person was unaware that the victim was a homosexual.

"Those who teach that homosexuality is contrary to God's design may find that they as well are targeted by this law," Duke said.

Current law, combined with the hate crimes measure, could cause problems for Christians and other religious adherents who believe homosexual behavior is a sin, said Rep. Louie Gohmert, R.-Texas.

"If you aid or counsel or induce someone to commit a crime, then you are just as guilty as the one who committed the crime" under existing law, said Gohmert, a member of a Southern Baptist church. "f you can say that someone's 'sexual orientation' is against Bible teaching or the teaching of the Tanach or the Koran, then you have just said that something is wrong, and if that stirs someone or induces someone to go out and commit an act of violence, which all of us are against, then just the inducement would be enough to go after a minister, a rabbi or an imam who says, for example, 'Homosexuality, under the teachings of the Bible, the Tanach, the Koran, it's wrong.'

"That could be argued to induce criminal conduct," Gohmert said at the news conference. "And that would allow pastors to be arrested for saying things are wrong.

"It would not take too many arrests to have an extraordinary, chilling effect on some religious teachings with regard to homosexuality."

 

It won't be to long before they be round us up and killing Christians

 

It all depends on how it's interpreted by the courts. It is possible that someone could be accused of inciting a crime by preaching against homosexuality if someone who heard them went out and harmed someone.

 

That's funny. I don't recall saying that homosexuality was not a sin. :BangHead:

Here is a suggestion meant to further your "learning": When I said "this isn't true", I was talking about the legislation and your mistaken opinion. It is not true that the legislation is going to make it illegal to say homosexuality is wrong. And even if it would, so what? People in the Bible gave their LIVES and you're going to complain about being arrested?

 

Logical fallacy. Keep learning.

By the way, if this bill is meant to punish violent acts against a certain group wouldn't it follow that it applies to violence against Christians too?:BangHead:

 

No! I don't believe that Christians are included!:tonofbricks: