Oklahoma Cop Sues Department Over Mosque Assignment

[ch33zw1z]

You said in that other thread about the Michigan Attack the muslims were in there right to attack the Christians for "starting a riot"

I suggest you find that post and link to it. Your post is useless without loegz.

 

[shadow9d9]

Well said. Christians are being persecuted by islamists and no one cares especially when its happening right here in the US

Christianity not only makes up a supermajority of the US, every President has been christian and a supermajority of congress is christian. Help! You are oppressed!

 

[shadow9d9]

Nice attempt to sugarcoat the truth about sharia law which states women aren't equal

The Bible says women aren't equal either...

 

[Incorruptible]

The Bible says women aren't equal either...

But how many Christians actually follow that compared to the quran which states murder of women is ok?

 

[cybrsage]

The Bible says women aren't equal either...

Judaism says women are holier than men.

 

[cybrsage]

On what basis do you hold it wasn't legal? Just because it isn't on their public website doesn't mean it isn't in the employee handbook, which is as far as I can tell, is not publicly available.

Also, there is something that can be done, the Police Department can as a matter of policy refuse to attend a KKK event, and almost certainly would. In this case, the Department decided it was going to attend but one individual within the department refused.

It is not in the law, so it is not a lawful order.

I do still think the guy was stupid for saying no.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Incorruptible

The OT requires killing women for offenses that are not outlawed today.

The "my redacted holy book is better than your holy book" argument is a farce.

 

[her209]

Wow, what kind of people work for Tusla PD?

This is to a Captain of the department too. Dayyyyyyyum!!!!
http://thislandpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/Personnel-Order-12-038.pdf

Link to local news story: http://www.newson6.com/story/178327...ct-unbecoming-an-officer?clienttype=printable

 

[alzan]

You said in that other thread about the Michigan Attack the muslims were in there right to attack the Christians for "starting a riot"

I asked for the post #.

 

[Incorruptible]

Incorruptible

The OT requires killing women for offenses that are not outlawed today.

The "my redacted holy book is better than your holy book" argument is a farce.

The difference is that Christians are smart enough to understand that its wrong where you have a majority of radical islamists who think murder is perfectly alright

 

[alzan]

The difference is that Christians are smart enough to understand that its wrong where you have a majority of radical islamists who think murder is perfectly alright

So the number of radical Islamists outnumber the non-radical islamists?

 

[Incorruptible]

So the number of radical Islamists outnumber the non-radical islamists?

The Christians aren't radicals, very few of them believe in that nonsense but with islam there is a much higher amount though

 

[alzan]

The Christians aren't radicals, very few of them believe in that nonsense but with islam there is a much higher amount though

Christians are usually not violent but radical all the same. Attempting to shutdown the building of mosques in parts of the country is pretty radical when freedom of religion is one of our most basic rights. Pushing by some for the teaching of the Christian creation myths in public school science classes is pretty radical since freedom from religion is one of our more basic rights.

 

[shadow9d9]

But how many Christians actually follow that compared to the quran which states murder of women is ok?

Umm... likely the same percent. Do you have some evidence or are you just going to use assumptions as facts? Remember, compare third world countries to third world countries if you are going to attempt it.

 

[shadow9d9]

Christians are usually not violent but radical all the same. Attempting to shutdown the building of mosques in parts of the country is pretty radical when freedom of religion is one of our most basic rights. Pushing by some for the teaching of the Christian creation myths in public school science classes is pretty radical since freedom from religion is one of our more basic rights.

Christians throughout history have absolutely been violent. What you are trying to say is that christians that are wealthy in first world countries are not likely to be violent(yet still do so-read the news lately?).

 

[shadow9d9]

The difference is that Christians are smart enough to understand that its wrong where you have a majority of radical islamists who think murder is perfectly alright

Here is your problem. You are just making up your own evidence because you wish it to be so. That isn't the way logic or facts work.

 

[cybrsage]

Incorruptible

The OT requires killing women for offenses that are not outlawed today.

The "my redacted holy book is better than your holy book" argument is a farce.

The Law of Moses never applied to non-Jews, unless they convert to Judaism (which then makes them Jews) or if the lived in the Land of Israel. The majority of Christians are non-Jews and the US is not Israel, so they are not redacted, they simply do not apply.

 

[jackschmittusa]

cybrsage

Why is the OT included in the Christian holy book if it is to be disregarded? Why do Christians insist that The Ten Commandments (part of Mosaic Law) be displayed everywhere? Why do they constantly refer to Leviticus to condemn gays?

Kind of blows your argument out of the water.

 

[cybrsage]

Most Christians will say the OT is there as a background story to help understand the NT better. They are kinda right in that it helps understand the NT better...but it is more than mere background.

In Exodus 19, God makes a covenant between Himself and the Israelites (the decendants of Jacob - who God renamed Israel). Unless you are an Israelite (or living in the Land of Israel), you are not part of the covenant. You can convert to Judaism and willingly accept the rules upon yourself and then your children will be bound to The Law due to being adopted into the Israelites.

The Law is an all or none deal - you cannot say part A applies but part B does not. This is where most Christians get it wrong. You can use The Law to show what God wants of Israelites, but that is it. You have to use other places to put rules onto everyone else.

For example, you can use the Cain and Abel instance to show God hates murder and that not doing it is applied to everyone. You can use the Council of Jerusalem to show that all Christians are to obstain from eating blood, eating meat given to idols, an from sexual immorality. To define what is in this immorality, you have to understand what those who said it would say - and they were all devout Jews. They would have put all the rules of The Law on sexual immorality into what is not allowed. So we can say those parts of The Law apply to Christians because of their ruling. It is not that we are referencing The Law and only applying parts of it to Christians, we are referencing the Council of Jerusalem and using those rules...some of which are based on The Law because they felt it was good to have everyone follow those parts (as told them by the Holy Spirit).

Also, most of the OT is not The Law, only a small portion of it is.

 

[alzan]

Christians throughout history have absolutely been violent. What you are trying to say is that christians that are wealthy in first world countries are not likely to be violent(yet still do so-read the news lately?).

I'm aware that Christians in the past were quite violent. If we're talking sheer numbers than most likely there are more radical Islamists than there are radical Christians. If it's a matter of interpreting ones religion in a way that one believes grants the right to kill non-believers than once again radical Islamists win hands down.

People of all religious stripes and of none are capable of committing violent acts or murders; most don't use the "G-d told me to do it" excuse.

 

[Incorruptible]

I'm aware that Christians in the past were quite violent. If we're talking sheer numbers than most likely there are more radical Islamists than there are radical Christians. If it's a matter of interpreting ones religion in a way that one believes grants the right to kill non-believers than once again radical Islamists win hands down.

Thanks for proving my point