Kentucky church bans interracial couples

Government, you, I, others do not define "tolerance". Tolerance just is. If you start to define the constrains, it is no longer tolerant. This applies to left/right/centre/christian/muslim/jew.

 

What you think they are doing by forcing memberships into groups that don't want those members? They are forcing their concept of tolerance on others. If you guys want that in Europe, have at it, we don't need it here.

 

What an idiotic argument. No church has the power to stop interracial marriage and every church has a right to choose who they associate with. The 1st Ammendment protects the church from the state.

The 1st Ammendment doesn't empower the government to force churches to teach the errors of evolution. The 1st Ammendment protects the church from such abuse.

We don't have a separation of church and state. It doesn't exist.

This is one of many great arguments for getting rid of public schools.

No it wouldn't. You might want to actually read the civil rights legislation that was passed almost 50 years ago. The strictures apply specifically to government and businesses, not to private clubs or churches. Specific exemptions include the right for churches and religious organizations to discriminate based on religion. If a church teaches that interracial marriage is wrong and some don't abide by those tenants, they can be evicted from membership.

 

Good points. I feel kind of the same way about Affirmative Action.

If I was black, I wouldn't want to work for someone who was only hiding their racism due to quotas. I'd prefer to work for someone who isn't racist to begin with.

Similarly, this church has shown its true colors (no pun intended), but they do have the right to be racist in their marriage ceremonies.

 

why what does it prove . there are bad people in ALL walks of life

[

 

agreed. but the right wing churches gives more fertile ground for this kind of stuff that is all

even reverend wright from president obamas church is not this bad,

 

People like those from "Westboro" will have that right, until we (Americans) finally change certain laws, to prohibit that kind of thing. (It makes virtually no sense, that they should be allowed to disrupt or heckle people at a funereal; eventually someone is going to get hurt physically.)

 

That's right. He just preaches that all whities are evil, not just mixed race couples.
C'mon folks, we are talking about one silly old hillbilly preacherman here, not the entire Christianity.
Show me that this congregation, or at least those who agree with preacherman are right wingers, and I will agree with your statement.
On the other hand, little more known right wing preachers like Hagee actually say openly that those who discriminate based on race are not welcome in his church.
Dang, now you turned me into a preaching woman.

 

We may not like what some are saying, but remember, roles can be reversed, and people we happen to agree with could be stifled by messing with 1st Amendment rights.
Who was it, Voltaire, who said that (paraphrased) I may not agree with what is being said, but I fight for their right to say it?

 

Good, don't repeat yourself.

Yes, it can. It can allow who it wants based on its beliefs. As I said, the Church is not run by the State.

Separation of Church and State. Remember?

Quantrill

 

Your exactly right. Everyone likes to have rights as long as its their rights. Once a view is protected also under those rights that they disagree with, then its time for the Feds to step in and shut it down.

Just like with Church and State. All the secularists love to cry Separation of church and state when someone wants to pray in a public place somewhere. But they don't cry separation of Church and State when the Church rejects someone that they think they shouldn't. No, they want government intervention.

Hypocrits of the first order.

Quantrill

 

Looks like some good ole fashioned negative press did they trick. They are gonna reverse it.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap...7r3Icw?docId=52139c66b0194f9abe611181e8090b16

 

.....well said.

 

You know what?

I have never, in my entire life, ever seen this happen.

Not once.

 

Where have you been? Prayer in public schools. Prayer before sports events. Bible studies in public schools. The nativity scenes of Christ on display on public property.

You havent ever heard any objection to these things?

Quantrill

 

None of those are simply "Praying in a public place".

While an authority figure (a principle or teacher) can;t LEAD prayers in a public school, a child can pray in the public schools all he wants.

There are LOTS of prayers before sports events.

Bible studies in public school isn't PRAYING, nor are nativity scenes on and paid for by public funds PRAYING. Those are things that involve spending public money on private religion.

But you can go pray in any public park or city hall steps or ball park iN THE COUNTRY.

You just want to make OTHER PEOPLE PRAY.

Sorry. Move to Iran or Saudi Arabia. They are YOUR kind of places!

 

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time taking your post seriously here considering who you have in your avatar.

Unfortunate about the church policy, though. I do agree there.

 

Praying in schools or at sports events are not praying in public places?

Oh, you don't want us to pray officially in public or at sports events because that will make other people pray. I see. Separation of Church and State, right?

But you want to tell the Church who it can and cannot allow in it. No problem with violation of separation of Church and State there.

Quantrill

 

What does my avatar have to do with liberty?

 

It has to do with the fact that you're condemning people for being racist while sporting an avatar of a man who wrote a song called "Expose Yourself to Kids." You're kind of sending a mixed moral message there. Especially when the man in question lived what he wrote about.

 

I said I support the churches right to do what they want. I also support G.G. right to live the way he wanted. That doesn't mean I have to agree with it but I can respect it. He was a true anarchist. One of the few and he would be ok with you kicking his ass over his believes. In fact I would suspect he would expect it.

Do you think he had sex with children or do you think he was making a point?

 

I got the impression you were not condoning the church's racially divisive policy since you called them (*)(*)(*)(*)heads. The contradiction between that and the GG Allin avatar just struck me as funny. That's all.

And GG wasn't really an anarchist. He was more of a nihilist. He didn't believe in anything. He just hated everyone and everything. And he openly bragged about having sex with children. In fact, he ran off with a 13 year old at one point. He wasn't the only one either. His drummer, Dino, also got arrested for exposing himself to a kid.

 

I'm ok wth nihilists too. He was an interesting person is all. I don't have to agree with everything he did. I just find his line of thinking interesting.

 

I can think someone is a dick head and still be ok with there right to be a dick head. I don't actually care what people do or believe.

 

I guess the point I'm making is he can expose himself to whomever he wants and I'm ok with someone kicking his ass for it.