Do you have an example where legislation is not based on empirical evidence of facts?
Every attempt to ban abortion.
Once again, I’ll thank you for not speaking for me about my faith.
to be blunt, it has nothing to do with the strength of my faith, but rather it’s about you and how you’ve treated religion since you’ve been participating n Hannity forums. I’ve challenged you on that before (maybe on the old board.) In my opinion, it’s pearls before swine.
No matter how I answer what you want reconciled, your particular bias is just going to disagree with it. I see no point in engaging your question on it.
Now some other lib is going to come here and tell me that I’m afraid to do so. That’s how it works around here.
Of course it is.
What is faith and do you have faith that The Lord spoke the Truth regarding Mary, the mother of Jesus still being a virgin?
Highlight a small part. Hit quote. Reply below that in the editor.
Then, with your cursor at the bottom of the current edit window, highlight another part of the post you’re replying to (or even a different post altogether!) and hit quote. A new quoted section is added where your cursor was in the edit window. (which uis why you should click your cursor at the bottom of the edit window first.) Reply below that. Wash. Rinse. repeat.
That’s just your interpretation of the drive behind such legislation.
What is the fact based reasoning for laws that discriminate against LGBT…or the lack of laws allowing for discrimination towards LGBT?
Is anything I say going to be met with anything but contempt or argument?
Even your questions show a prejudice toward a particular viewpoint. I don’t see the point in engaging them.
Further, I doubt I would say anything you haven’t already seen (and dismissed) in countless other threads, so again, I don’t see the point in it.
I asked a pretty basic question.
If you are unable to answer, that is fine.
There is empirical evidence, and there is faith/religious based opinions.
There are times, these can be in agreement.
I prefer the former.
The best way I have heard it explained is to start with the basics:
- God is love and loves us. However, He is not our personal Genii
- God designed the world, so everything that happens is part of His design.
- Humans are always getting things wrong (Original Sin)
God’s purpose is to steer us on the right path. Think of gravity. If we choose to step off a cliff, do we blame gravity and claim that gravity hates us and is evil? Or do we understand that if we choose to step off a cliff, there will be consequences–no hate, not evil involved.
Likewise, if we decide we are above God, putting our projects first, thinking only of what self wants, not what God wants or our neighbor wants, isn’t it logical that we are not going to listen, and eventually, we are not even going to understand one another any more. Example: How well do we understand each other of immigration issues or what our President is trying to accomplish with his administration? Is it God who is confusing us today? Or are we doing it ourselves even though we can point to the parameters God placed us in?
To what are you referring?
Thanks. Will give that a try.
And I am not speaking “for” you.
I’m coming to a conclusion based on the evidence before me.
And it didn’t work. I just tried to highlight another part of your post and it just published what I was trying to say.
Anyway, if I was speaking “for” you, I’d say something like, “Guvnah believes in a loving God because he’s a Catholic.”
I think I made it clear that I am unwilling. Not unable.
The post I quoted.
That’s how it works.
I gave no evidence.
You are making unfounded assertions.
That’s putting words into my mouth.
Well it does for me.
Not sure what else I can say here.
I’m even picking snippets from separate replies you made.
Even from different people’s replies.
To Catholics it is not allegory - don’t know about other Christian religions.