kengs333

Can't think of a country that has ever allowed large numbers of people enter it that comprised the same ideology that it was currently at war with.

Well, the 6th annual convention--actually, two were held in 2004--has just rapped up. Should be interesting to see what this evolves into during the next couple of decades...

It's interesting how you, like your buddy cybercoma, prefer to base you opinions on what you think I mean instead of the facts. Haggerty lived a lie, he was a sinner, and he midlead and deceived many people. That's how sinners work, but now that this has come to light, and he has admitted his faults, if he sincerely attempts to overcome this problem and eventually succeeds, then all will be well. But in the end there will now always be doubt, and only he can know in his heart whether he is sincere in overcoming his homosexuality as others have already proven can be done--just as people overcome addictions to drug, alcohol, pornography, etc. In the end God will decide what his fate is, not me or anyone else. Sadly, people like you would prefer to believe that people can't overcome their sins, that they are condemned to living in sin; and yet you feel that you can mouth off about the evils of Christianity when it's people like you that allow evil and sin to reign on this planet.

Didn't somebody just have a chat with you about this kind of nonsense?

You know, I'm wonder when you are going to start dealing with the reality of the opinions expressed in my posts, rather then always engaging in this fanciful misrepresentation based on your own ignorance and biases. No, I do not believe in the "debasement of women"--as a Christian I want all people to rise above sin. Moreover, expecting the wife to take on the role of raising the children is not "debasement" because I don't view children or child-rearing to be "base"--providing a sound and stable family structure, one in which there is always a loving and attentive mother, and a just and providing father is a good thing. And as anyone who has studied this topic will tell you, the traditional nuclear family is and always has been the best means of raising children. It really makes one wonder what kind of person would object to such a thing as children being raised properly and in a loving environment... As for homosexuals--people who engage in that kind of lifestyle "debase" themselves; they are always free to leave that lifestyle and raise themselves up again.

All of these things were done in Indians societies, as well, so your assertion is simply a product of your hatred of Christianity. One can argue that thanks to Christianity, women have had more human right than they ever had in any pre-Christian society. People like you want to deconstruct this, however, based on some sort of mythical ideal about Indians and the egalitarian societies that they never had.

Oh, I think that would be very interested if we got back to that kind of thing. First of all, very, very few people who are devout Christians engage in "breaking the law", and if they do, it's probably one of those technicalities of the law which could trap anyone. As for people who are Christian in name only, or perhaps baptized as infants, and who have no interest in being Christian or even claim to not be Christian but are still identified as Christians, what would that prove? Moreover, what if we started ging back to identifying people's race? This is now deliberately not done by the media because it would no doubt incite certain people... If you look at homicides in Toronto: what percentage of the victims and perps are black? What about crime in southcentral Ontario: how many are perpetrated by Indians? Why is it that the article about a farm being robbed on ginseng negates to mention the race of the perps--could it have been because they were Asians? Another thing I wounder about is why when a murder is filmed for a TV program were the two Indian perps portrayed by whites? Maybe this deception is done for a good reason, to keep racial tensions from heating up again, but it also shows how the media fudges the truth and manipulates us unto believing untruths, just like the Nazis and the Soviets used to do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Union

Not what I would call an uncharacteristic response. It's funny that you would downplay the persecution of Christians in a post that includes the snide remark "lameheaded Jesus/God". According to people like you, being Christian means being denied the right to think freely and develop an intellect, yet time and again you have shown that your atheistic worldview has provided you with a middling IQ at best.

Isn't this what the gay rights movement is doing? The fact of the matter is, though, teaching children the truth about God and Jesus has done much to improve society and many people have lived good, safe and productive lives because of Christianity. Feel free to pick up any history book on non-Christian societies to see what life was once like; look at ancient Rome, China, etc. look at what life used to be like for pre-Contact Indians--it was short and brutal, people had no rights, and they practiced witchcraft and demon worship. You just don't get it; you just don't understand how good your life is because of the influence of Christianity on the creation of our society; yet you would still rather see it done away with, and see society slide back into the lawlessness and depravity of pagan cultures of the past.

Pariah? What an utterly crude remark.

Hmmm... this is getting nowhere fast. You ask for examples of how Christians/Christianity is being persecuted, and when it's provided you claim I don't "understand the meaning of the word." If you don't want to have an intelligent discussion about the issue, then don't even bother responding.

You've never been to Germany, I suppose; anyone who has would know that this is not true, that it's simply a stupid assertion.

I'm willing to discuss religious matters in a rational manner; engaging in this sort of childishness is not acceptable.

http://www.persecution.org/suffering/index.php

I'm trying to find where that "threat" was made and who made it. I find it quite disturbing, and I think that it is indeed a threat as you say. This is already something that was done to me by the now banned "Posit" and I kind of suspect that someone else has already contacted a certain group about me. It's frightening how these people work, and yet they genuinely can't believe why people always seem to have issue with them.

How so? Canada had allowed c. 150,000+ Jews to enter the country prior to WWII. The turning away of a boatload of refugees, regardless of who they were, is something Canada had the right to do, and still does--although now it's done individually and with no fanfare. Nobody cares because the people who are denied entry don't suit an agenda. It's clear why you're so outraged by that incident, just as it's clear why you're not outraged by the refusal of others to enter this country, or, for that matter, the fact that Christians are being beaten, mutilated, raped, murdered throughout the Middle East and the government of Canada is doing NOTHING about it either. So please spare us your biased indignation, your constant slagging and disrespecting of Canada.

Let's see, all three links that I checked dealt with the same well-known incident, isolated incident. It's absolutely preposterous that someone would hold an isolated, extremely rare incident such as this as being indicative of the norm. It's almost Nazi-like in its rationale, and I can't think of a better example of how you yourself clearly have some sort of problem. Anyone who has dealt with Amish or Mennonites will tell you what the truth of the matter is when it comes to the stability of families. The Amish and Mennonite tend to have large families, and they do tend to be interconnected to a great degree (which I assume is what spawned the slur about "incest"); these communities are the typical rural communities where everybody knows everybody and all their affairs, which tends to lessen the ability for such things to happen. And they are also deeply committed to living peaceful, non-violent lives. The fact that you would make such comments is the most odious and blatant display of hatred that I've seen on this forum. Shameful.

You're disgusting. The way you go around painting people as antsemites and holocaust deniers just because they have issues with Israel's record of human rights violations and then you make this kind of comment trying to pass yourself off as some sort of champion for everybody's right to "free speech". People like you really concern me and have done more to erode the ability for people express themselves freely.

Now we're taking a page from Rue's guide to malicious lying? How exactly is wanting people to be better, free from sin, and for Canada to be good "hateful" and "intolerant"? I'm interested where you get the notion that I hate women. I find the reference to Jews to be most particularly ignorant, though, especially considering the manner in which you are so hostile to Christianity. Astonishing how glibbly you can brush off something so clearly illustrative of the truth when it doesn't suit you. You would be outraged if that was a video in which Jews were the subject of the rant, and I doubt the fact that it was "really old" would be a concern either. Oh, you didn't see the episode, then, did you--"inteligently [sic] debate their agenda" their agenda, indeed. Well, thanks again for another really brilliant post.

Absolutely not.

That's pretty sad that you have to be so snide about this. I think the persecution of Christians in the century has resulted in more deaths that any persecution of any other group. I hate playing the numbers game, but unfortunately with people like you I think it's the only way to drive this reality home. As for my supposed lack of interest in the "persecution of other religions" well, as a Christian, it's clear where I stand on this matter, but that still doesn't mean that I am not concerned and disheartened by the sufferings and death inflicted upon people throughout the world.

That's the point, Rue; you deliberately refer to Santa Claus when you know that I'm a Christian, and that I've made statements about not approving of the incorporation of paganistic or secularized aspects into my belief. Again, another example of how people like you work, trying to twist things and making sly insulting remarks, but act all innocent when called on it.

I believe this person--if it is who I think it is--is in fact an anarchist. As such, s/he would like to see a complete breakdown of society, which is why they gravitate to Caledonia where they try to sow discord by baiting people into conflict and then videotape it in order to sow more discord among those who watch these videos.

Anger: Disrespect: Hostility: I'm not "assum[ing] to know what others think," I'm basing my opinions on the very words that you write. The fact that you try to cover yourself by claiming "no anger or hatred here" or that your "no special respect" isn't really "disrespect" isn't fooling anyone. Nice try, though. In the end, when I look at the attitude people like you have, when I see people willfully deny God and speak maliciously about Christianity, and then see them engage in behaviour that is destructive to both themselves and society, it's clear to me that any argument that people like you is unfounded. You try to argue that as a Christian I should be "tolerant" of everything that people do or believe, eventhough there is nothing in the teachings of Christ that suggest such a thing. Christ taught that there is a definite right way of living one's life, and not striving to do so is wrong. Wrong behaviour is in defiance of God's will, because wrong behaviour is destructive. I really shouldn't have to explain this. We all know what happens to people who live intemperate lives; there are innumerable examples of this. God wants people to be good, moral people who do not live in sin--so I question the real motives of people who would rather see this not be the case. You can couch your attitude toward God and Christianity however you want, but in the end the intent is no different than that of others who are more forthright in their hostility.