Breaking: Per SCOTUS, Same-Sex Marriage is now law of the land.

[MisterChester]

Yay civil disobedience! Yay nullification! (We're still for that, right?)

Let Justice Kennedy, Ginsberg, et al come down to Texas and enforce their ruling.

That so worked last time.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

View attachment 39557

That so worked last time.

So...we don't like nullification now?


I wish you guys would publish the rules for this stuff.

 

[MisterChester]

So...we don't like nullification now?


I wish you guys would publish the rules for this stuff.

Nullification can go either way. I don't think whether it's good or bad is so clear cut. Maybe it's a good thing when nullifying the rule in question expands freedom/doesn't infringe on the rights of others, like nullifying gun regulations. Trying to nullify a rule which would result in less freedom would typically be bad.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Nullification can go either way. I don't think whether it's good or bad is so clear cut. Maybe it's a good thing when nullifying the rule in question expands freedom/doesn't infringe on the rights of others, like nullifying gun regulations. Trying to nullify a rule which would result in less freedom would typically be bad.

So it's a matter of conscience?

 

[cobber]

So it's a matter of conscience?

As long as your conscience is politically vetted.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Yes. I believe that rights and wrongs exist.

Gun control, for example, is a wrong. It is a wrong pushed by those who crave more power. Nullification of any gun control is a moral right.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

As long as your conscience is politically vetted.

Well Hornady's not around anymore to do the consistency checks and it's void that needs to be filled, apparently.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Yes. I believe that rights and wrongs exist.

Gun control, for example, is a wrong. It is a wrong pushed by those who crave more power. Nullification of any gun control is a moral right.

I think the governor of Texas would agree with you.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Well Hornady's not around anymore to do the consistency checks and it's void that needs to be filled, apparently.

What happened to him?

 

[KG1]

What happened to him?

He got shootered. If I recall correctly he was busting VUPD's balls Hornadlyl style in a thread and pushed the button too hard and wouldn't let it go and was ejected. I think it was a cumulative effect thing overtime though that contributed to the outcome.

 

[IndyDave1776]

He got shootered. If I recall correctly he was busting VUPD's balls Hornadlyl style in a thread and pushed the button too hard and wouldn't let it go and was ejected. I think it was a cumulative effect thing overtime though that contributed to the outcome.

Why do I not have any difficulty believing that such a thing could happen? I can also understand that cumulative effect, especially when general presence and behavior turn into the tie-breaker on a close decision.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

He got shootered. If I recall correctly he was busting VUPD's balls Hornadlyl style in a thread and pushed the button too hard and wouldn't let it go and was ejected. I think it was a cumulative effect thing overtime though that contributed to the outcome.

This is pretty accurate.

 

[MisterChester]

He got shootered. If I recall correctly he was busting VUPD's balls Hornadlyl style in a thread and pushed the button too hard and wouldn't let it go and was ejected. I think it was a cumulative effect thing overtime though that contributed to the outcome.

I sometimes miss the debate with hornady and 88gt. Made for some interesting talk.

 

[Denny347]

I sometimes miss the debate with hornady and 88gt. Made for some interesting talk.

I feel the same way. I appreciate opposing views as it constantly forces me to question mine own.

 

[rambone]

This thread, since I posted the pastors letter, really goes to prove a point that has been made for decades (and used to be the way things were in this country). There is no such thing as a christian in America. There are just, (as there always have been) various sects with their own interpretations of their books. There is no big tent or umbrella and they only really come together infrequently on a few issues. The zealotry is amazing. And the outlooks of some are frightening. Adherence to a book that has changed over time, (so-called christians do not adhere to all parts of their book, as the good pastor points out) for to do so would be an abomination. Genocide? All good in the book. Forcing a rape victim to marry her rapist? Fine and dandy. Slavery? Okey dokey. Things get set aside, (and rightly so). At least we get to see the big tent fray into tatters.

Don't be frightened, all I did was quote the New Testament for you. The confused pastor says he has trouble interpreting it, so maybe those verses will help clarify. The sin of sexual immorality is listed right alongside lying, stealing, and murdering in the bible. Its sinful status has in no way, shape, or form been "set aside" by the work of Christ or any bible author. It is a timeless sin and even receives explicit mention as the object of God's wrath in the Book of Revelation.

If any pastor wants to unite his flock with proudly practicing sinners, it should be recognized that he has departed from Biblical ministry. The Apostle Paul warns the church in Ephesus that there should "not be even a hint of sexual immorality" among the congregation (Ephesians 5:3). Similarly, Paul instructs the church in Corinth to completely shun anyone who claims to be Christian but remains sexually immoral (1 Corinthians 5:9-13). It seems that God is more interested in holiness and purity than about popularity.

In case it isn't obvious, these are rules for governing the inside of a church, not secular civil law. "For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?"

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Hi, I am super-serious journalist with super-serious story.

Why Scalia should resign

 

[MisterChester]

Hi, I am super-serious journalist with super-serious story.

Why Scalia should resign

I just want to ask him what the legal definition of "jiggery-pokery" is.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

What Actually Comes Next | RedState

Somewhat apocalyptic, but not wrong on all accounts.

It will come. It has to come. If gay marriage is a fundamental right under the equal protection clause, it is going to trump a lot of the first amendment. As Chief Justice Roberts noted, King Anthony’s theology precludes “free exercise” of religion.

But all of this is down the road a few years. Let me tell you what is going to happen first.

Silence.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Don't be frightened, all I did was quote the New Testament for you. The confused pastor says he has trouble interpreting it, so maybe those verses will help clarify. The sin of sexual immorality is listed right alongside lying, stealing, and murdering in the bible. Its sinful status has in no way, shape, or form been "set aside" by the work of Christ or any bible author. It is a timeless sin and even receives explicit mention as the object of God's wrath in the Book of Revelation.

If any pastor wants to unite his flock with proudly practicing sinners, it should be recognized that he has departed from Biblical ministry. The Apostle Paul warns the church in Ephesus that there should "not be even a hint of sexual immorality" among the congregation (Ephesians 5:3). Similarly, Paul instructs the church in Corinth to completely shun anyone who claims to be Christian but remains sexually immoral (1 Corinthians 5:9-13). It seems that God is more interested in holiness and purity than about popularity.

In case it isn't obvious, these are rules for governing the inside of a church, not secular civil law. "For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge?"

While, homosexuality is a sin, I dont think the excludes people from attending church. A preacher should welcome them with open arms, but should no mince words about how our faith views the subject. To us non-clergy, it's none of our business, and certainly none of the govt's business. That issue is something that is taken up with that person, and God.

 

[IndyDave1776]

While, homosexuality is a sin, I dont think the excludes people from attending church. A preacher should welcome them with open arms, but should no mince words about how our faith views the subject. To us non-clergy, it's none of our business, and certainly none of the govt's business. That issue is something that is taken up with that person, and God.

The problem is introduced when the pastor/church start condoning sin in the name of being inclusive. It sounds like you pretty much have the right answer, but my concern is that two different subjects are being discussed. I certainly would not make them unwelcome, but most certainly would not water down the message, condone sin, or put such persons in positions of leadership.