Source of white hatred of blacks identified

[Lon]

Surely you do not think such a promise would be broken if a good Christian was killed young in battle? Do you think Christian young people who honor their parents are immune from early deaths?

It was given by Moses and Paul. Does it stop a bullet? No, but God does. I simply believe God. It doesn't mean if someone dies young, they were disobedient, it simply means as a rule, God makes a promise of long life to those who honor their parents. Simple enough without discounting God's promise I'd think? Would such, for a Christian (Paul's audience) carry into eternal life for the promise? I'd think so.

It reminds me of a quote: All people have been/are alive, but not all people really live. The promise from God carries some important points and Paul says it is indeed a promise.

 

[marke]

It's a completely different plane of reality.

Bible-believing Christian views are seen by the unregenerate as being outside the bounds of reality. God is real. Hell is real. Unbiblical and anti-biblical worldly views are foolishness.

 

[marke]

Protesting a bit much there, you sound a lot like those whites fearful of losing their majority.

I don't care if whites are outnumbered by blacks by 10 to one or more. I don't care if communists outnumber Christians by 100 to 1. No accumulation of mass support for ungodly opinions and ideas will ever overrule God.

 

[marke]

It was given by Moses and Paul. Does it stop a bullet? No, but God does. I simply believe God. It doesn't mean if someone dies young, they were disobedient, it simply means as a rule, God makes a promise of long life to those who honor their parents. Simple enough without discounting God's promise I'd think? Would such, for a Christian (Paul's audience) carry into eternal life for the promise? I'd think so.

It reminds me of a quote: All people have been/are alive, but not all people really live. The promise from God carries some important points and Paul says it is indeed a promise.

I believe God. I believe God honors His promise to reward children who obey their parents in the Lord with long lives. I do not believe that God breaks that promise every time a good Christian dies young. I don't think we should take verses out of the Bible and force strict unbending interpretations onto those verses as if God will never violate our own constructs of the parameters of those verses.

 

[Idolater]

I don't care if whites are outnumbered by blacks by 10 to one or more. I don't care if communists outnumber Christians by 100 to 1. No accumulation of mass support for ungodly opinions and ideas will ever overrule God.

That's exactly what us liberals think, who believe in natural human rights. Nothing should ever overrule our rights, because they are God-given.

 

[marke]

That's exactly what us liberals think, who believe in natural human rights. Nothing should ever overrule our rights, because they are God-given.

Human rights? Are you talking about the right of a Christian to refuse service to Sodomites for religious convictions? The rights of Cubans to be delivered from communism? The rights of Americans to make their own medical decisions about masking, social distancing, and vaccines? The rights of conservatives, Christians, and republicans to share conservative views on the internet? The rights of Churches to refuse to pay for abortion coverage? The rights of Americans to pass voter security laws for protection against fraud in spite of the fraudsters who do not like voting securities?

 

[Idolater]

Human rights? Are you talking about the right of a Christian to refuse service to Sodomites for religious convictions? The rights of Cubans to be delivered from communism? The rights of Americans to make their own medical decisions about masking, social distancing, and vaccines? The rights of conservatives, Christians, and republicans to share conservative views on the internet? The rights of Churches to refuse to pay for abortion coverage? The rights of Americans to pass voter security laws for protection against fraud in spite of the fraudsters who do not like voting securities?

If that's what you think I mean, then no.* In that case, I mean, the right to free legal representation. Because every single one of these matters you raise, needs multiple law firms working on them in order to hash them all out in a society and polity such as ours, that believes in protecting our rights, rather than promoting any kind of moral law, as that establishes either a religion, or the ethical equivalent of a religion, in an atheist moral philosophy of some type, which is against the First Amendment.

We need lawyers before we need anything in this country, and I don't count that as a bad thing, because we are a nation of laws, what I count as bad is that we're not discussing that free legal representation for all, is a more important right than so many of the other Nonconstitutional (not Unconstitutional, just that they're not enumerated in the Constitution) rights that we all argue about.

All other things being equal, parties with legal representation get better outcomes than parties without legal representation. Everybody is entitled to free legal representation.

=
* I mean the uncontroversial ones to begin with, the absolute rights, against murder, against rape, against perjury, against kidnapping, and against other violent crimes. Violent does not necessarily mean it leaves a mark.

 

[marke]

If that's what you think I mean, then no.* In that case, I mean, the right to free legal representation. Because every single one of these matters you raise, needs multiple law firms working on them in order to hash them all out in a society and polity such as ours, that believes in protecting our rights, rather than promoting any kind of moral law, as that establishes either a religion, or the ethical equivalent of a religion, in an atheist moral philosophy of some type, which is against the First Amendment.

We need lawyers before we need anything in this country, and I don't count that as a bad thing, because we are a nation of laws, what I count as bad is that we're not discussing that free legal representation for all, is a more important right than so many of the other Nonconstitutional (not Unconstitutional, just that they're not enumerated in the Constitution) rights that we all argue about.

All other things being equal, parties with legal representation get better outcomes than parties without legal representation. Everybody is entitled to free legal representation.

=
* I mean the uncontroversial ones to begin with, the absolute rights, against murder, against rape, against perjury, against kidnapping, and against other violent crimes. Violent does not necessarily mean it leaves a mark.

I don't need a lawyer to tell me I cannot believe and serve God, because not even a lawyer can turn that demonic lie into the truth.

 

[Idolater]

I don't need a lawyer to tell me I cannot believe and serve God, because not even a lawyer can turn that demonic lie into the truth.

I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about: you feel that a law is infringing your freedom, so you get your free lawyer to file a lawsuit. Your attorney, free of charge, will work through the appropriate channels to get it in front of judge, and if you don't like the ruling, your lawyer will appeal for you, also for free, all the way to the Supreme Court if need be.

But then, if the Supremes won't hear it, then you'll just be back with the rest of us, who do not like the ethics of others necessarily, but we see that the logic of believing in God-given human rights means we can't impose our own ethics on others, even though morals are absolute and universal and objective and designed into our DNA by God.

 

[marke]

I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about: you feel that a law is infringing your freedom, so you get your free lawyer to file a lawsuit. Your attorney, free of charge, will work through the appropriate channels to get it in front of judge, and if you don't like the ruling, your lawyer will appeal for you, also for free, all the way to the Supreme Court if need be.

But then, if the Supremes won't hear it, then you'll just be back with the rest of us, who do not like the ethics of others necessarily, but we see that the logic of believing in God-given human rights means we can't impose our own ethics on others, even though morals are absolute and universal and objective and designed into our DNA by God.

Christians rarely impose their beliefs on others. Wicked leftists commonly impose their beliefs on others, like their faith in global warming nonsense, faith in evolution nonsense, faith in masking nonsense, faith in economic shutdown nonsense, faith in leftist election lies, faith in sexual depravity, faith in abortion, and so forth.

 

[marke]

Ephesians 6:2“Honor your father and mother” (which is the first commandment with a promise), 3“that it may go well with you and that you may have a long life on the earth.”

I see no biblical justification for saying that any Christian who dies before the age of 70 must not have honored his parents when younger.

 

[marke]

Of course he knows it's racist language.

That's not racist language. This is racist language:

Did a Texas A&M Professor Advocate Killing White People?

Professor Tommy Curry's comments during a 2012 podcast were taken out of context.

www.snopes.com

Tommy Curry is an associate professor at Texas A&M. He is black, and specializes in Critical Race Theory. Prof. Curry does not limit his teaching to the classroom. He has a strong presence on YouTube.

In this brief interview, he discusses when it is appropriate to kill white people:

“In order to be equal, in order to be liberated, some white people might have to die,” he says.

The Tommy Curry Situation

Racism, violence, and the continuing story of the racialist radical Texas A&M prof

www.theamericanconservative.com

You can find all kinds of talks online from Tommy Curry trashing white people and black people who are insufficiently radical (e.g., “Stop Absolving White Folks”). In that talk, Curry condemns progressive white academics who criticize whites for the way they have treated Native Americans.

“Contemporary white feminists pretend that they can simply converse [sic] these ideas without consequence,” Curry says. In other words, shut up, white woman, because your skin color makes you guilty. Curry goes on to say that white feminists allow the “academic-industrial complex” to “pimp out oppression,” and that “white people and whiteness” are “responsible for the genocide” against Native Americans, “and continue to enforce today as a slavetocracy [sic] against African descended people.”

Tommy Curry believes that black Americans today live under a “slavetocracy.” He said so. And he thinks black Americans ought to be thinking about the historic example of armed black people who were prepared to use lethal force to protect themselves in a time when white people were allowed to terrorize them with impunity.