Bishop refuses to condemn horde of vandals invading church

Lisa558

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2021
Messages
63,182
Reaction score
65,164
Points
3,488
The invasion of the Cities Church was not a “peaceful protest” but rather a horde of threatening vandals violating the law and terrifying children - and this bishop refuses to condemn it.

Just go down to the video and listen to how activist Nekia’s invasion is akin to a violent, threatening, intimidating group of foreigners taking over a small town.

And P.S. Yes, female blacks are disproportionately causing these problems.

 
wp-1469633897438.webp
 
The invasion of the Cities Church was not a “peaceful protest” but rather a horde of threatening vandals violating the law and terrifying children - and this bishop refuses to condemn it.

Just go down to the video and listen to how activist Nekia’s invasion is akin to a violent, threatening, intimidating group of foreigners taking over a small town.

And P.S. Yes, female blacks are disproportionately causing these problems.


There was no invasion. The question should be why a ice thug is a minister. He has no business being there. They should be protested. I don't rely on the observations of Mazi pigs like you.
 
I have no idea what that’s supposed to be, other than some dig against religious people (would be my guess).

Other than that, do you condemn the mob that invaded the church, in violation of the FACE act?

You can do both. Condemn those interrupting a service and condemn a minister being a part of ICE.
 
I have no idea what that’s supposed to be, other than some dig against religious people (would be my guess).

Other than that, do you condemn the mob that invaded the church, in violation of the FACE act?

The FACE act should be unconstitutional but we have 6 Supreme Court thugs who give Christians special privileges.
 
I have no idea what that’s supposed to be, other than some dig against religious people (would be my guess).

Other than that, do you condemn the mob that invaded the church, in violation of the FACE act?
I think he is showing the only time Jesus showed anger, by chasing the "money changers" out of the temple.

1769266758714.webp
 
You can do both. Condemn those interrupting a service and condemn a minister being a part of ICE.
What’s wrong with supporting law enforcement in their effort to rid the country of dangerous criminal aliens? You say it like it’s a bad thing.

P.S. I’m heading out now. We will resume this lovely debate late in the afternoon.
 
Ah. But that means that he (the posters) think the churchgoers in MN are doing wrong. All they did was go to church to worship.
Or the rioters are doing wrong by disturbing "a house of prayer" and should be chased out.
 
The FACE act should be unconstitutional but we have 6 Supreme Court thugs who give Christians special privileges.
The FACE act is constitutional and calling SCOTUS a bunch of thugs is very stupid. Do you prefer a lawless society?
 
There was no invasion. The question should be why a ice thug is a minister. He has no business being there. They should be protested. I don't rely on the observations of Mazi pigs like you.
Can you prove that the minister (conducting the service) was employed by ICE? I think you are lying.
 
Last edited:
The FACE act should be unconstitutional but we have 6 Supreme Court thugs who give Christians special privileges.
Agreed. We should be able to storm abortion clinics and berrate the women there for the murders they are.

Or are you so ******* ignorant to not realize that the FACE act protects both?
 
15th post
Easterwood said he has worked for ICE since 2015.
Easterwood was not conducting the service when it was interrupted, from your link:

"None of the videos show Easterwood in the church, and it’s unclear if he was in the building on Sunday."
 
Back
Top Bottom