Re: This is what's next on the liberal agenda. -- Mamusz' Restoration Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 08:34:04 08/26/11 Fri
Author: George
Subject: Re: This is what's next on the liberal agenda.
In reply to: Lois 's message, "Re: This is what's next on the liberal agenda." on 22:52:31 08/25/11 Thu

>>>>and yet statistics show that the vast majority of
>>>>pedophiles are straight... go figure...
>>>>
>>>>john
>>>>
>>>
>>>Well, John, if you are still alive by the time the
>>>same tactics used to convince you to buy into same
>sex
>>>marraige get turned on you by the pedophiles, are you
>>>going to bowl over as easily as you did the first
>>time?
>>>
>>>Morality is morality, John. It can't be subdivided
>and
>>>remodeled piece-meal.
>>>
>>>Acceptance of fornication leads to acceptance of
>>>adultery. Acceptance of adultery leads to acceptance
>>>of same-sex marriage (which, like the other two, is
>>>just another nail in the coffin of Christian
>>>marriage.) The only question here is whether
>>>pedophiles or polygamists are going to be the next to
>>>jump on the bandwagon.
>>>
>>>Since you are a priest of the CofC, and the CofC has
>>>official ceremonies for "blessing" the sexual
>>>cohabitation of unmarried couples, married (but not
>to
>>>each other couples), and same sex couples, you are
>>>already to the next fork in the road.
>>>
>>>Of course, when you reach it, you can always break
>>>down in uncontrollable laughter.
>>>
>>>George
>>Actually morality is perhaps one of the most relative
>>commodities there is. So I think it can be divided
>>and parsed and piece-mealed. It happens all the time
>>and has throughout history.
>>It is when someone tries to exert her morality on
>>another that problems arise. That is much more
>>dangerous than the slippery slope scenario that you
>>propose.
>>
>>I will regret accepting the invitation to come here I
>>am sure.
>>
>>Sean
>
>Sean,
>
>What's the matter? You don't like it that on this
>board liars and deceivers get "outed"? Morality is not
>a relative commodity with Jesus Christ. If you think
>it is then you are not Christian.
>
>Lois

John's denial of the opposite-sex shacking up ceremonies is most shocking, given that Matt has already admitted that they happen. Matt emphasized that they weren't so bad because they rarely happen. Imagine a doctor telling the State Board of Medical Examiners that his writing his wife a prescription for Dilaudid was o.k., because he didn't do it very often. How about a pharmacist selling prescription drugs out the back door to teenagers -- rarely?

Moral relativity is a disease. The Jewish rabbis realize that morality is complicated, and specific problems of individuals have to be dealt with in the context of those specifics, but declaring relativity and abrogating the rules is not one of those way of coping. And the rules, regulations, ordinances, and laws of the church are just as strict as Jewish law, and those getting paid handsomely to "lead" the church are responsible for seeing that those rules are respected and followed. By way of example, I'm sure that Jesus forgave Jim Bakker for raping Jessica Hahn; however, he still got fired for violating church law that plainly declare sexually immoral people -- whatever their "lifestyle" -- as unqualified and unfit to lead God's people, regardless of how nice and unassuming they may be.

If several of the offspring of hierarchs were rapists, would the church be pushing for a rule stating that rape is not a barrier to the priesthood, if the rapist is moderate, rather than serial?

Alan Dean Barber got no forgiveness. He got the gate. Perhaps he isn't related to anybody on the Council of Twelve, or on the staff of the seminary.

That's how morality is "relative." If you have relatives in high places, they will make everything you do all right. In relative morality, justice is reserved for those who have no relatives in power. It is only the relatives who get mercy, whether they are repentant or not.

I had a colleague who arranged mercy for the unrepentant in the matter of his son. After fifteen years of that, he had to cut him loose. Then justice suddenly "happened."

George

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Thread Summary (Very Brief) -- George, 09:12:58 08/27/11 Sat
- Re: Thread Summary (Very Brief) -- Lois, 10:31:59 08/27/11 Sat
  - Re: Thread Summary (Very Brief) -- George, 12:50:04 08/27/11 Sat
- Next on the Liberal Agenda -- The Beat Goes On -- George, 18:34:36 09/18/11 Sun
  - Next on the Liberal Agenda -- Maybe Bestiality is Next -- George, 07:49:52 10/13/11 Thu
    - Re: Next on the Liberal Agenda -- Maybe Bestiality is Next -- john, 17:15:07 10/13/11 Thu
      - Re: Next on the Liberal Agenda -- Maybe Bestiality is Next -- George, 22:13:55 10/13/11 Thu