DescentBB

...or the Christian variant. We have at least 3 Presidential candidates backing this guy at his rally:

http://mic.com/articles/128285/republic ... .ivMkeyzEg

I guess these guys want to start a religious war or something, because no self-respecting LGBT person would sit still for that nonsense if it became the law of the land.

The things Rev. Wright was preaching never became law.

Spidey wrote:The things Rev. Wright was preaching never became law.

but, when some goofy imam suggests it, we're on the brink of Sharia, right?

Spidey wrote:The things Rev. Wright was preaching never became law.

Surely you can see the sociological context of Wright's sermons as a minority fighting for equality, and Swanson's advocation of death for a minority?

Yea, but that’s not the point.

callmeslick wrote:

Spidey wrote:The things Rev. Wright was preaching never became law.

but, when some goofy imam suggests it, we're on the brink of Sharia, right?

When have you ever heard (read) me say anything like that?

I once made the case that some very local areas can be dominated by religious beliefs/people, but that is about it, never said anything about religious law of any kind becoming American law.

....

My hidden point by bringing up Rev. Wright was to remind people that Obama was once accused of guilt by association, and the same people who objected to it are now doing the same thing.

"Guilt by association" is not quite what's happening here. People's associations can tell things about their character that they may not put on their resume. Obama's willingness to attend a church headed by Rev. Wright, and Republican candidates attending a meeting hosted by a man with a history of calling for violence against homosexuals. Most of you here, and I are diametrically opposed with regard to the perversion of our society, but in my opinion, based on the short video clip, this man is not wrong about the severity and extent of the sins perpetrated in this country, nor about causing children to stumble (a Biblical concept you don't hear every day). It's much easier for people to latch onto only a part of the message of scripture, and complete it with their own opinions, agendas, etc. What I hear in his talk is a call to supposed Christians for non-Christians to repent, and IMO that is an odd message. Legitimately calling people to repentance is very different, involving the preaching of God's opinions/perspective, and a request for a decision that can be made at that point by the people being spoken to. His isn't even a call designed to be answered--more like us VS them cheer-leading.

What this tells me about those candidates is that A) they attend churches where this sort of cheer-leading takes the place of actual ministry/salvation, or B) they lack the depth to recognize the difference. Being unable to recognize that a man who calls for violence against sinners is off in left field isn't exactly a positive trait for a "Christian" politician, I grant you.

I’m not sure what this says about a persons character other than a politician’s willingness to pander for votes.