degenerative morals of irrational personality disorder individuals that demand that their immoral acts overrule those of the moral individual. While many politicians speak loudly and proudly of supporting "fairness", they support immoral actions disproportionately when confronted with morality advancement. This detrimental position has led to degradation of the American society through excessive legal obstruction of "freedom fairness and equality". Do you believe it is time for Christians to sue immoral individuals for such attacks or to charge the government with discrimination?
sort by best latest
Thank you for this - I believe most rational people, Christian or otherwise, can agree this is the best approach.
I sure wish that the laws did keep reasonable order. However, under our current laws, many lawsuits have been leveled against moral individuals by immoral individuals. The government seems to continually side with the immoral to degrade society.
I totally agree.
Great response Peeples! I'm with you 100%.
You presume to understand something that is only a fragment of logic within your own mind. The question does not imply opinion but contains facts about immoral and moral conflict. Do you believe that the government should choose one over the other?
Again many of moral and immoral is a matter of opinion. Who decides what is moral?
Individuals decide what is moral for their environment. When the government forces an individual to support anything the individual terms immoral, the government discriminates. This discrimination is forced immoral support for the individual.
So do you support the idea of forcing moms not to work because many southerners still consider it immoral for a woman to leave the house (example)? Should the government not step in when the individuals are being unreasonable?
It is not immoral for a wife to stay home with the children. Nor is it immoral to respect those that work. Using a similar analogy, do you believe the government should force me to be gay? Should the people not step in and declare this illegal?
Many I know see it as immoral. Again opinion. The government has yet to force people to commit immoral acts, just to accept what that individual may see(opinion) as an immoral act by another. When they start saying you HAVE to be gay then I'll agree.
I've been subjected to this mentality about moms, so I know exactly how this feels. And I'm in the North! I've been told I lived high off the hog when I had a career, and now I'm told to stay in because it's a mans job to garden.
The courts and government do require those of moral upbringing to support immoral acts. When we refuse to support them, the government then takes away our livelihood. That is discrimination, but many still support it choosing immoral over equality.
I'll agree to disagree. The courts have never required support, just equality. The freedom to have the same rights as everyone else. It amazes me how so many consider gayness immoral when so many children show signs of being gay at such an early age.
The courts and government do require us to support immoral acts. They require companies to supply support to abortions, hire minorities who do not possess the proper skills, etc. Many support this discrimination. Others do not and then get sued.
Yes - we all have a choice. But only some of us must pay for the immoral acts of others when we make our choice. That is unequal discrimination. For a government that is not supposed to favor or restrict religion-the USA sure does attack it often.
Oh I see what you are saying. I think I misunderstood. Yes, the government is supposed to separate from religion.
Yes that is correct. However, the politicians and radical groups wish to generate divisive turmoil by discriminating against moral individuals. The attacks have risen to a demonic level now and the nation will be destroyed if not averted.
The government requires us to fund abortions, force us to support gay marriage, and degraded moral education. Morals are not relative but principles of conduct that produce a peaceful loving society. Current government encourages the opposite.
The government does NOT require anyone to fund abortions. Women who need them pretty much pay out of their own pockets. And gay people getting married has nothing to do with you, no one says you have to "support" it, you can think what you want.
The government requires companies to provide birth control, abortion, gay marriage, homosexuals, and other behavior support the individual finds offensive. Truth is - no one is forcing the individual to work with those who find these offensive.
No one is being forced to take contraception, have an abortion, or have a gay/lesbian marriage. It's all about choice and citizens have the right to choose, not be stifled/shunned by a church or religious group.
I do have a right - to choose my friends, my lifestyle, my support for righteousness, and my opposition to immoral activity. But, the government believes they can charge me with wrong doing as I express these rights. That is discrimination.
Rather the government is saying your will is not the will of the people and you cannot apply your values in discriminating against others. Just because you believe your way is the only way doesn't make it fact. God bless and have a nice day.
Again - you take one side - this makes it discrimination. I do not discriminate because I only take my own side. I choose who and what I support without discrimination because it is solely based on my choice. If this offends the immoral so be it
I'm against all zealots...right, left, up, down, white or brown. The Crusades and Taliban are clear examples of zealots gone amok. The Christian Right have not been anointed the God police.
Again-there comes an attack. This drives discrimination through a choice by a third party that states one individual-structure is better than another. When everyone is permitted to make their own choice with no third party force-equality is achieved.
My wife has a Masters in education and has taught in a Christian school for 39 years. Never would my wife teach your skewed and prejudiced views. If you need the last word, then the floor is yours, but I'll stand with acceptance. and tolerance. Bye.
pagesvoice - your response is typical of those who wish to deny the government discrimination used to degrade the nation. Education system has been flawed for years as it demands obedience to immoral corrupt acts. Acceptance expands the immoral acts.
You haven't written any articles on HP, so what is your agenda here? Furthermore, what is your educational background to cast stones at those who have dedicated their lives in the educational field? Your views and philosophy are extremely flawed.
My educational background includes running a magnet school where we taught the individual to think for themselves. This included teaching the individual to read and interpret for themselves rather than being one of the herd.
You have succeeded to be correct and incorrect at the same time. Pvt Manning was sentenced for distributing classified information. If he felt the information to be atrocities he should have raised that concern appropriately. Heroes do not do wrong.
When the people at the top are the evil ones who is he going to report it to?
It amazes me that people are condemning him without looking at what he disclosed. Things like tax money being used to buy children for pedophiles.
It is too bad that people believe everything that they read in the media. No validation has been provided for any of the disclosed information. The military has charged some individuals with illegal activities. Not every court martial is public.
The validation is the material itself.
This is kind of like saying that the German's films of the holocaust killings, death camps and slave labor haven't been validated.
Like the films were made by aliens who can't prove they were real Germans.
Just like the Germans, individuals have been charged. Due to testimony of individuals I personally know, they have been sent to prison charged with crimes. War is hell. Information leaked that endangers soldiers is treason. Manning is like Al Capone.
Al Capone was never convicted of treason he was convicted for tax evasion.
Manning saw evil being done that went beyond anything acceptable, since there was nobody higher who wasn't involved he turned it over to Wikileaks hopping it might be stopped.
Haha... what? Is that what the right-wingers say now? As someone who studies history in depth, you've got to appreciate how blatantly made up that claim is. Err, the nations being destroyed part, because I'm not touching the alleged "God" bit.
Your verse is about rebelling against God, not rebellion against tyrant. We know law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers, ungodly, sinful, unholy, for those who kill and murder, for sexually immoral, and for homosexuality. We can fix it
No, we can't fix it, that's the whole point of the bible. It chronicles man's failure to remove sin from among us, because only God removes sin. Rebellion is the sin of witchcraft, and you need to read 1st Samuel chapter 8, the subject is gov't.
Samuel 8: 7 And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king.
We can fix it using righteous love devoted to the Lord our God through Jesus.
Yeah, you can fix it using righteous love in obedience to Jesus Christ, but you can't do it with government. That's my point.
Don't cry out to God to save you, when your government turns on you and persecutes you. (1st Samuel ch8 v18).
God will assist me because I do not worship the government. I only worship my Lord and Savior. He is the only shepherd that I follow. According to 1st Samuel ch8 v18, God will not assist those who worship another King.
Good, and so I would suggest to stay away from voting or any involvement with politics. It is nothing but an illusion of choice, given to us by wicked men claiming to be enlightened thinkers: "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools."
Of course. How could I have missed the fact that it is valid to discriminate against one person so long as we do not discriminate against another. No shirt - No shoes - Nooo Service. When a person is denied religious freedom it is discrimination.
And when the ideals of religion are inflicted on other that is also discrimination.
Nobody is preventing a person to observe their moral code, so long as others aren't being harmed or infringed upon. That is freedom.
When I choose not to associate with immoral people based on my moral upbringing, I do not harm or infringe upon others. When the government forces me to support those individuals the government is harming and infringing upon my freedom.
I don't see anyone being denied religious freedom. In fact, we live in one of the most religiously tolerant places in the world but I so often see religious people, specifically Christians, claim that they are under attack – preposterous!
When an individual is required to support, house, or provide service to immoral individuals due to government determination or decree, they are under attack. It is only preposterous to those who believe that discrimination through man's law is legal.
But you forget that those who you claim you are forced to support are also supporting the things you want supported regardless of their beliefs.
It would be great if we could all direct our tax dollars to our own causes, but not practical.
How sad that someone in the USA believe that the government is better equipped to decide how to spend my money. That is because the government has coerced many into poverty and welfare. This slavery has then led to the divisive condition of the USA.
The bottom line is that the voters allowed the government to take our personal power away and increase their rule over us.
But between a corrupt system and corrupt media things aren't apt to change. Republicans and Democrats will be the ones ellected