Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I would like to see if that is indeed true....if it is...all this claiming she just became a "christian" would be amusing to say the least.She's a new christian? What was she beforehand?Anyone can go on facebook or any where else on-line and claim to be a pastor or what ever else they want to claim. It does not make it true.
This guy does not sound like any pastor or true Christian let alone a Baptist.
He sounds more like an activist.
Why? Because he is not bigoted enough for you?
Talk about hate. whew- eee !
NO because he did not know that she is a new Christian and that her past was forgiven when she took Christ as her savior and her sins were forgiven.
I read that she was a Baptist before joining the ACC
"Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
The majority most certainly has rights, exercised through their votes...but this is not a Democracy like you seem to think it is...we are a Constitutional Republic....the rule of law applies. You can get 99% of the voting public vote for something, but if it goes against the Constitution and it's amendments, it is unConstitutional and cannot become enforceable law. That's how things are in this country. Welcome to U.S. Government 101.And.....................there you have it folks. The Bill of Rights and civil rights means nothing to this poster.So...when the majority said that there should be Jim Crow laws...they should prevail?75% of the voters thought so. What happened was 75% of the voters had their votes vacated while 25% had their votes validated. Gays and lesbians only make up about 6 or 7 per cent of the total population. Get real. You'll never have 100% agreement on any issue but the majority should prevail.
I wouldn't have any problem with it if the majority actually supported it.
You feel better now? Good. The rights of the majority mean nothing to you - just so you have your way. You're just another "victim", right?
It's a small county....I'm sure she knows...and doesn't care. Because, like you, she is a hypocrite.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
Has nothing to do with repentance.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
I'm not a victim at all...what is it that makes you seem to get that from my posts? It is not my fault you have some knowledge gaps about how our government works.And.....................there you have it folks. The Bill of Rights and civil rights means nothing to this poster.So...when the majority said that there should be Jim Crow laws...they should prevail?75% of the voters thought so. What happened was 75% of the voters had their votes vacated while 25% had their votes validated. Gays and lesbians only make up about 6 or 7 per cent of the total population. Get real. You'll never have 100% agreement on any issue but the majority should prevail.
I wouldn't have any problem with it if the majority actually supported it.
You feel better now? Good. The rights of the majority mean nothing to you - just so you have your way. You're just another "victim", right?
It's a small county....I'm sure she knows...and doesn't care. Because, like you, she is a hypocrite.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
The majority most certainly has rights, exercised through their votes...but this is not a Democracy like you seem to think it is...we are a Constitutional Republic....the rule of law applies. You can get 99% of the voting public vote for something, but if it goes against the Constitution and it's amendments, it is unConstitutional and cannot become enforceable law. That's how things are in this country. Welcome to U.S. Government 101.And.....................there you have it folks. The Bill of Rights and civil rights means nothing to this poster.So...when the majority said that there should be Jim Crow laws...they should prevail?
I wouldn't have any problem with it if the majority actually supported it.
You feel better now? Good. The rights of the majority mean nothing to you - just so you have your way. You're just another "victim", right?
Then why isn't Obama not under arrest for all his Constitutional violations and for not enforcing our immigration laws and laws against civil disobedience? Why isn't Hillary not under arrest for violating our national security laws governing the handling, transmission, and possession of classified documents including Top Secret of which every rank-and-file federal civil servant is held accountable? It depends on who is breaking the law doesn't it. Really. Straw Dog.
You say that a second time....where have any Liberals here "cried victim"? Besides, why would we? We're winning. You're losing. Life is good.I'm not a victim at all...what is it that makes you seem to get that from my posts? It is not my fault you have some knowledge gaps about how our government works.And.....................there you have it folks. The Bill of Rights and civil rights means nothing to this poster.So...when the majority said that there should be Jim Crow laws...they should prevail?
I wouldn't have any problem with it if the majority actually supported it.
You feel better now? Good. The rights of the majority mean nothing to you - just so you have your way. You're just another "victim", right?
All Liberals cry victim.
She holds all the records. She's the court clerk.It's a small county....I'm sure she knows...and doesn't care. Because, like you, she is a hypocrite.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
Now she's a mind reader? You're an idiot, only God knows what's in one's heart. You just respond to be annoying
She holds all the records. She's the court clerk.It's a small county....I'm sure she knows...and doesn't care. Because, like you, she is a hypocrite.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
Now she's a mind reader? You're an idiot, only God knows what's in one's heart. You just respond to be annoying
I like that pastor!Baptist Pastor Crushes Kim Davis And The Hypocrisy Of His Fellow Evangelicals In Open Letter
The letter:
"Since I am a pastor of a southern Baptist church please allow me to weigh in on the case of Kim Davis, the lady in Kentucky who refuses to issue a marriage licenses to a same sex couple.
First: This is not a case of the government forcing anyone to violate their religious belief. She is free to quit her job. If she quits her job to honor God surely God would take care of her.
Second: This is not a case of someone trying to uphold the sanctity of marriage. If she wanted to uphold the sanctity of marriage she should not have been married four different times. If she is worried about her name being affixed to a marriage license that goes against a biblical definition of marriage, she should not have her name on the last three marriage licenses given to her.
Third: This seems to be a case of someone looking to cash in on the religious right. Churches all across the south will throw money at her to come and tell congregations how the evil American government put her in jail because of her faith in Jesus.
This is why we are losing.
This is why people have such disdain for evangelicals.
Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it. If ever there was a “take the log out of your eye” moment, this is it.
We must stop looking to the government to make America a Christian utopia. Our kingdom is not of this world.
We must abandon all thoughts of fixing others and let Jesus fix us.
If we want sanctity of marriage then stop cheating, stop having affairs, stop looking at porn, stop getting divorces. That is the way for the church to stand up for the biblical definition of marriage, not by someone martyring their self-righteous self."
(non-copyright material, can be published in its entirety)
Let the wailing and gnashing of teeth begin. He's a Christian and a Pastor. She is not a Pastor. So, who is right, here?
Hmmmm???
It's a small county...people have a tendency to know each other. They don't live in isolation like you do. But perhaps you are right...she knows no one in her county and is completely in the dark.It's a small county....I'm sure she knows...and doesn't care. Because, like you, she is a hypocrite.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
Now she's a mind reader? You're an idiot, only God knows what's in one's heart. You just respond to be annoying
Has nothing to do with repentance.And she's cherrypicking which sin to not support."Not because we disagree but because we don’t take the bible seriously. If ever there was a case of “he who is without sin cast the first stone”, this is it"
The good pastor forgot the rest of it....go and sin no more. He's cherry picking the Bible. What a doofus
Has she refused her seal to 'no fault' divorce, or to new marriage licenses to those that have had a 'no fault' divorce?
Is she not issuing licenses to thieves or is homosexuality the only sin she's against?
How would she know if a divorced person has repented or asked for forgiveness? No way she would know. She knows gayper marriage is a violation of God's law
Not supposed to remarry until the divorced spouse is deceased. Unless there's no sex involved. Then it wouldn't be adultery.
How does she know the gay couple is having sex? It's the sexual act that is the sin, not the marriage
The decision was the worst in history. Worse than Plessy v Ferguson. Worse than Roe v Wade. The Supreme Court threw out:And he's a liar as well. The Supreme Court trotted out there and changed the definition of Kentucky's marriage law as well as some other states and then turned around and went off to dine on lobster tail leaving a lot of local and state governmental officials subject to jail and lawsuits instead of even making a minor attempt at staving off the collateral damages stemming from their decision. That clerk could have been sued by some other party for issuing the licenses in violation of Kentucky law. The state attorney general could have arrested her for issuing the licenses to same-sex couples. She was caught in the crosshairs. She was doomed to violate either one law or another. It should be the Court's responsibility to foresee things like this. The state of Kentucky should have gone to jail if anyone needed to - not that little county clerk.
You claim;
"That clerk could have been sued by some other party for issuing the licenses in violation of Kentucky law. The state attorney general could have arrested her for issuing the licenses to same-sex couples. She was caught in the crosshairs. She was doomed to violate either one law or another. It should be the Court's responsibility to foresee things like this." [Emphasis Added]
The Supremacy clause, Article V, Clause 2, of the Constitution made the Kentucky statute in question MOOT the moment the Supremes released their decision in Obergefell v. Hodges last June 26th. There would have been no jeopardy what so ever attached to Kim Davis if she had just done her sworn duty and issued those licenses to any same sex couples requesting one.
You claim. I submit she fulfilled her sworn duty as pertaining to the law she swore to uphold when she took office. The law in effect in Kentucky at the time she took office was the law she took an oath to uphold. The law was changed dummox.
The law is often changed. This is why we have mechanisms in the US Constitution to allow for changes in the law. Those who cannot adapt to change have no business being in the position of a Kim Davis to begin with.
75% of the voters thought so. What happened was 75% of the voters had their votes vacated while 25% had their votes validated. Gays and lesbians only make up about 6 or 7 per cent of the total population. Get real. You'll never have 100% agreement on any issue but the majority should prevail.
1) 2000 years of Western tradition, which holds marriage is one man, one woman
2) 200 years of American Jurisprudence, which holds judges interpret laws
3) the 10th Amendment, which holds powers not specifically granted to the federal government are retained by the states
4) 200 years of tradition that holds states primarily define marriage and similar laws within their borders
5) Over 200 years of tradition that holds the Will of the People is the ultimate arbiter of standards
6) The principle of one man, one vote
7) The principle of limited government
Now the Supreme Court can invent anything, call it a right, and declare that it is protected under the 14th A. There is no limiting principle to it.
