Search results

The 14A limits States - not private business. Except for a few exceptions, private business can discriminate as much as they please.

PUL-EASE. That’s stretching legalism to the breaking point.

1st, being in a minority group does not bestow one with virtue. 2nd, sinners are the largest majority on Earth.

You keep falsely equating being Black with acting homosexually.

There is no such right to dictate to another. Most States are ‘at Will’ employment.

That almost sounds like an answer to my question; that you do realize that the Bible explicitly states that homosexuals will not inherent the kingdom of God. Now, can you understand that a loving Christian would want everyone inherent God’s kingdom?

Not sure where that long rant came from. This thread is about the Constitution in general and the 1A in particular. It seems you keep trying to make it about something else. There is no ‘separation of church and state’ in the US Constitution. This we agree on.

I can but I won't. 1st, I think you know what it means. 2nd, I don't speak a unique language. I speak English, were words and idioms are already defined. 3rd, your search engine works as well as mine to understand better this expression. :D Not sure why you are asking this. Consider What is the...

Yup Yup. Growing up in Massachusetts, it was that way. And there is a Supreme Court case that supports these Sunday Law Reforms. Shocking confession. The 1st Amendment states religion is NOT the business of governemnt. I don't know what these 1st and 2nd tables you are referring. However...

It is a constitutional thing. And again, you're using the language of the enemy. It is not merely worship but religion and religious practice in total that is the subject, which is much larger than merely the 1 hour worship service. Your question is equivalent to, "is freedom also a bad...

Great point and I agree. My point was never that the new covenant occurred in Ezekiel's time. Rather, that the heart replacement was to be done without strings attached. By "unconditional covenant" I mean in contrast to a quid pro quo contract. A covenant means both parties will do their part...

Then you are blind and deaf. Do you realize that the Bible explicitly states that homosexuals will not inherent the kingdom of God?

Your premise is flawed. You suppose you are correct unless evidence is presented to the contrary. But then you deny the mountain of evidence. Consider the OP

And your actions put friend on the table from the start?

The point of difference is grace v works based theology. Her repeated contention is the new heart is a quid pro quo reward for what she calls "AFTER lay down their natural blood lives for Belief IN the Lord God Almighty." Ezekiel 36:26 is not a quid pro quo contract but an unconditional...

If you are not interested in posts or even threads, you are not required to post in them. Regarding the so what of defending your doctrines not based on Scripture, I leave that to the reader.

Amazing. You double down on doing what you claim you are not. Exegesis much? Add to Gods word to your hearts content I suppose, right?

Because your wrong, in denial. The statements made are based on genuine, actual research. Homosexuality is as evil as anything is and it should not be surprising that there are bad NATURAL consequences.

What? You mean you are not posting on this forum to be my friend?! It makes me wonder what else could your agenda be?

Are you struggling so for a rationalization, you are holding inaction as equal to action?