Alabama’s Sunday School Teacher Turned Governor: I Will Obey ‘Gay Marriage’ Ruling Over God’s Law

BentleyMONTGOMERY, Ala. — The governor of Alabama, who formerly served as a deacon and Sunday school teacher at the Baptist church where he remains a member, says that he will obey the recent federal court ruling striking down the state’s Sanctity of Marriage Act as being unconstitutional.

Gov. Robert Bentley told Politico on Friday while attending a meeting of the National Governor’s Association in Washington, D.C. that he believes he must obey the courts even if he disagrees with them personally.

“[I would] never do anything to disobey a federal court ruling,” he told the outlet when asked about last month’s same-sex “marriage” decision, which Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has called on others to fight.

“We are a nation under laws,” Bentley said. “We may not always agree with them, but we obey them.”

The governor, who attends First Baptist Church Tuscaloosa, additionally told AlabamaNews that while he and Moore have the same convictions, they differ when it comes to compliance with federal court rulings. He said that he would not punish probate judges who decided to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses, nor those who have refused to do so, but will wait to hear from the U.S. Supreme Court on the issue.

“I don’t want Alabama portrayed in a negative light because when it’s portrayed in a negative light, it doesn’t help me to recruit jobs in Alabama,” he said. “So I’m hurting families when I can’t help people get a job in this state.”

“I want to do everything I can to make sure the people across the country, the people across the world, realize that Alabama is a different state,” Bentley stated. “And I will obey the law and that’s what I’m going to do.”

  • Connect with Christian News

Trewhella
Trewhella

But Matt Trewhella, pastor of Mercy Seat Christian Church in Milwaukee, Wisc. and author of “The Doctrine of the Lesser Magistrate,” told Christian News Network that Christians should never place man’s decrees above God’s law.

“What must be realized is that the rule of law in Western civilization was built upon the moral law of God as revealed in Scripture,” he said. “The reason homosexuality was illegal throughout Western civilization for nearly 1,500 years was precisely because the moral law of God declared it a crime.”

“So, when you now have law made by men that is contradicting that, men should not recognize it as true law, and men in positions of authority like Bentley should actually oppose such a court ruling,” Trewhella explained.

He said that it is hypocritical for Christians to place “the law of the land” over God, whether it be court opinions affirming homosexuality or the slaughter of millions of innocent babies through abortion.

“This is a huge problem that Christians have in America as they separate their Christianity from their politics,” the pastor and author stated. “It makes it convenient for them to betray Christ, even in office.”

Trewhella said that if Bentley was handling the matter as a biblical Christian, he would join Moore in defending Alabama’s Constitution and resist the ruling.

“[H]e should be doing exactly what Judge Moore is saying, and that is [declaring] that this federal court ruling is immoral and unjust, and we’re not going to recognize it,” he outlined. “He should be defending Alabama’s Constitution from federal tyranny.”

During an interview earlier this month on CNN, Moore pinned down interviewer Chris Cuomo as to whether or not he would have obeyed the 1896 Supreme Court ruling in favor of racial segregation.

Moore
Moore

“Would you have followed the order in Dred Scott saying that black people were property? Or would you have followed the order in Plessy versus Ferguson that says separate but equal was the policy of the United States?” Moore asked.

“It’s not my place to answer,” Cuomo replied.

“Well, I’m asking you if you were the Chief Justice of Alabama, would you follow Plessy versus Ferguson and Dred Scott when they were issued. Yes or no?” Moore repeated.

“You follow the law of the land,” Cuomo said. “That is what our nation is based on.”

Martin Luther King, Jr., in his well-known “Letter from Birmingham Jail,” written in Alabama during a time when segregation was considered the law, said that while some may question disobedience to civil law, a law is not a law if it violates the law of God.

“One may well ask, ‘How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?’ The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust,” he explained. “I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”

“How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law,” King continued. “Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire.”

Christian News Network attempted to reach First Baptist Church Tuscaloosa, but no one could be reached for comment.

Updated 2-23-15: This article has been updated to reflect that Bentley once served as a deacon and Sunday School Teacher at First Baptist Church Tuscaloosa, but is no longer serving in those capacities. He does, however, remain a member of the congregation.

Bentley Photo: Facebook 


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • Gary

    Bentley is a typical politician. He is only interested in himself. His Christianity is fake. He should not even be allowed to be a church member, let alone be a Sunday School teacher. By his own admission, he would do ANYTHING that a federal judge told him to do. Alabamians should understand what he is, and what a threat he is to them and their children.

    • dark477

      Supremacy Clause. All State politicians are required to do what the Feds say

      • Gary

        Honorable men do not uphold dishonorable court decisions.

        • dark477

          I’m afraid they do, you just can’t ignore a ruling because you don’t like

          • Gary

            Then you have no clue what honor is.

          • dark477

            What’s honor got to do with it? this is a matter of duty

    • Haqodeshim

      Todd Starnes: ·

      President Obama lied to the nation in 2008 when he said he opposed gay marriage for religious reasons, according to a new book by former political advisor David Axelrod.

      Time Magazine reports Obama even lied inside Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church.

      “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said at the time. “Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

      He lied inside a church. He lied outside the church. He lied to the nation.

      • Haqodeshim

        Obama’s lies are like the Energizer Bunny unfortunately, they just go on, and on, and on, and on . Of course,we know who the Father of lies is, so much for Obama’s fake Christianity.

        • Ambulance Chaser

          It’s not possible that he just changed his mind?

          • Haqodeshim

            Why would his campaign adviser say “Obama lied” instead of just changing his mind? If your campaign adviser has to testify to your lying, then you didn’t just “change your mind” and there is no reason for David Axlerod to lie about the person he helped become President and still supports for that matter.

  • Nailz73235

    I give Gov. Bentley tremendous credit for this courageous stand. Although Alabama, and the United States for that matter, has a large number of Christians, it is a state supremely governed by the U.S. Constitution — not the bible or any other sectarian text. Biblical law has no place in a pluralistic, secular constitutional republic like ours, nor does Sharia law or laws based upon Hinduism’s foundational texts. Laws must have secular justifications that pass constitutional muster. The banning of same-sex marriage flunks that test. As such, the ban is improper, unconstitutional and, now, unenforceable.

    • TheBBP

      That’s not courage, it’s cowardice. He is just trying to save his job. We are called to obey the law of the land until it contradicts the Word of God. Courage would be to stand his ground in his faith and before God and be willing to accept whatever consequences may come of it.

      • Nailz73235

        Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution does it say that persons of the U.S. government are called to obey the law of the land until such time as it transgresses the word of god. Our country does not excuse lawlessness inspired by religious mania. I credit the governor for standing up against the fundamentalists, fanatics and extremists.

        • TheBBP

          I am not talking about the US Constitution.

          http://biblia.com/bible/esv/Acts%205.27-29

          Acts 5:27–29
          27 And when they had brought them, they set them before the council. And the high priest questioned them, 28 saying, e“We strictly charged you not to teach in this name, yet here you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and you fintend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” 29 But Peter and the apostles answered, “We must obey God rather than men.

          From this, it is clear that as long as the law of the land does not contradict the law of God, we are bound to obey the law of the land. As soon as the law of the land contradicts God’s command, we are to disobey the law of the land and obey God’s law. However, even in that instance, we are to accept the government’s authority over us. This is demonstrated by the fact that Peter and John did not protest being flogged, but instead rejoiced that they suffered for obeying God (Acts 5:40-42).

          Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/laws-land.html#ixzz3SUhlv5q7

          • Nailz73235

            You may not be talking about the U.S. Constitution, but I am not talking about the bible. What a religious text prescribes and/or proscribes is irrelevant. As noted, ours is a pluralistic, secular constitutional republic. What the bible says means nothing in the context of our government, our policies and our politics. Quoting from The Acts of the Apostles has no more relevance than quoting from Guru Granth Sahib.

          • TheBBP

            So, you are taking my position that is based on something that you are not talking about and arguing it with something that I am not talking about… Brilliant. Jesus loves you, friend.

          • Nailz73235

            And the Ethereal Cosmic Catfish loves you, despite your prostration before a false god. Very loving and forgiving, the Catfish is.

        • Gary

          The US Constitution does not instruct a governor to obey any order given by a federal judge, which Bentley has said he would do.

          • Nailz73235

            You’re a mite confused, Gary.

            A federal judge is fully empowered to determine whether a state statute, including a state constitutional provision, comports with the U.S. Constitution. And, if the federal judge deems the statute federally unconstitutional, he or she may enjoin the state from enforcing that statute. Judge Grenade has, in fact, enjoined Alabama from enforcing its gay marriage ban.

            As an officer of the state of Alabama, Gov. Bentley is bound by the federal judge’s order that enjoins enforcement of the unconstitutional statutes banning gay marriage.

        • lynn

          The extremist are ISIS and they hate all of us, and I hear that is especially so with gays. They are comming for us, and that includes athiest. You either bow to their version of Islam or it’s off with your head. Christians are the least of your problems.

          • Nailz73235

            The problem is with religious fundamentalists, whether they happen to be Muslim-flavored or Christian-flavored. In both cases, the fundamentalist zealots want public policy to align with their arbitrary, yet fanatical, religious beliefs.

            If Christians were willing to live THEIR lives according to Christian precepts, while leaving everybody else alone, then Christians would not be a problem. However, in Alabama and elsewhere, the Christian community continues to want to inflict its values on everyone else.

            Want an example? The just-ruled-unconstitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Such statutes are the Christian equivalent of Sharia law. Toxic, in every form.

        • Jack Savage

          And sticking to his oath office!

      • Edward Parker

        Exactly, he is a complete failure, caring only for money and position when he at one time professed to honor GOD.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        “We are called to obey the law of the land until it contradicts the Word of God.”

        As Governor, he has taken an oath to obey the law of the land. Period. If someone believes that they are not able to fulfill that oath, they should not take the oath to being with.

        What you are suggesting is that a person take an oath, then violate that oath. How would that be consistent with the Christian faith?

    • Gary

      The Constitution does not mandate the legalization of ssm. If you think it does, you are either ignorant, or insane. Which one are you?

      • Nailz73235

        Sadly, Gary, the confusion of your previous reply has carried over, because you seem as confused as ever.

        A number of judges, including federal judges and judges sitting on federal courts of appeal, have ruled that state bans on same-sex marriage DO, in fact, violate the U.S. Constitution. And, to be specific, Judge Granade’s ruling explicitly found that Alabama’s same-sex marriage ban was federally unconstitutional. That’s why she enjoined any such provision from being enforced. That’s why gays and lesbians are being married in Alabama right now. Lots of ’em.

        So, I’m neither ignorant nor insane. Sadly for you…I’m right.

    • lynn

      Christians will remember this in the next governors election.

      • TheBBP

        It won’t mean much even if they do. Tragically, party-line and single-issue voters from both parties trump all. If a Democrat stood up and said “I will outlaw abortions and end the legality of immoral marriages.” there are SCORES of Republicans who will not vote for him due to his party affiliation alone.

        The masses in this country are driven by political headlines and emotions fed to them by the media.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    “We are a nation under laws. We may not always agree with them, but we obey them.” – What a justification of doing evil and bending of truth and a conscience. Anyone who does atrocities can say such thing. The USA needs the Word of God for regaining sanity. “We should obey God rather than men.” (Acts ch. 5)

    • dark477

      Render unto Caesar what is Caesar. remember that?

      • Gary

        And render to God what is God’s. That is the rest of that statement.

        • dark477

          marrige is a legal contract that make it a goverment issue.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            Marriage is a the union between a man and woman in the sight of God and at His command. The state can call a union anything they wish, but Holy Marriage was one of the first covenants God made with man. If the state is going to change it around and make it other than God ordained it to be, it can no longer be considered true marriage in its original context. I am not Catholic, but it occurs to me that violation of God’s plan for marriage may be why that church only recognized in the past marriages done in church by priests.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Marriage is a the union between a man and woman in the sight of God and at His command.”

            You have described the religious rite of marriage. Civil marriage has no religious requirements.

            “If the state is going to change it around”

            The state is not changing, nor does it have the power to change, the religious rite of marriage. Each religion is free to continue to perform marriage ceremonies according to – and only according to – their belief system.

          • dark477

            it doesn’t matter what you or any religion considers marriage to be, if the government says two people are married then they are.

  • Grace Kim Kwon

    “We are a nation under laws. We may not always agree with them, but we obey
    them.” – What a justification of doing evil and bending of truth and a
    conscience. Anyone who does atrocities can say such thing. The USA
    needs the Word of God to regain sanity. “We should obey God rather
    than men.” (Acts ch. 5)

    • Nailz73235

      It sounds like you wish the U.S. were a Christian-flavored Saudi Arabia. It’s not. We are a pluralistic, secular constitutional republic. The bible has no place in our policies, or our politics.

      • Jerry_In_IL

        It sounds like you are ignorant of American history.

        • Nailz73235

          Certainly not. Three points:

          1. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme governing document of this country.
          2. The U.S. Constitution references no creator and is, in fact, wholly secular in all respects.
          3. The Establishment Clause has been consistently interpreted to forbid laws that have the purpose or the effect of promoting religion, especially the sectarian beliefs of any particular religion.

          • Conderned

            Once again this is a man made of late structure for which the entire world is going Gaga because you can do whatever you want, you can be unfaithful, steal from your neighbor, murder your parents, lie to everyone, you can be corrupt and not be held accountable for anything. America was build on Christian values. So I suppose punishment doesnt need to be handed to the guilty and people being murdered all over the world is ok.

          • Nailz73235

            This country’s secular legal system is fully capable of sustaining, and fully empowered to enforce, laws that help stabilize our society. These include prohibitions on slavery, rape, torture and murder. No biblical underpinning is needed in our secular, pluralistic republic.

          • Concerned

            Clearly you are a lawyer or aiming in that direction and its OK, regardless of your unbelief, Jesus died for you and He loves you and even if you pay Him no mind He is real and ignoring the truth doesn’t change it. Pinning underpinning sustaining stabilizing or empowering, call it what you like, its structure did not come from the goodness or sensitivities of man, it had to have a higher power in order for it to be implemented because greed alone would have sunk man in the first 100 years. Holding true to the law is what makes any country strong and safe and if GOD is not real and man could be trusted the way you say by secular means, then lawyers and law makers would not be needed either and in saying that if a man of the cloth forsakes his own belief to uphold man made laws which were imposed on him by secular means, whereby taking away his freedom of choice and restraining him to a life of suffering, then the enemy has already won.

          • Nailz73235

            I am quite in awe of the simplicity of your thinking, according to which, apparently, simply saying words makes them true. Let me try:

            “It’s OK…regardless of your belief, Jesus did not die for you (or anyone) and, since he has been dead nearly 2000 years, he does not and cannot love you, even if you constantly pay him mind. Jesus as god is not real, and ignoring that fact doesn’t change it.”

            Wow! I guess it works for me, too!

            There is no necessary connection between any god, including the Christian god, and effective government. History has shown that societies that are governed are the most functional, since governing authorities lend stability and organization to societies. One can easily arrive at numerous conclusions — outlaw rape, outlaw torture, outlaw thievery, outlaw murder — on a purely secular basis: all of the above destabilize society and eat away at intrasocietal cooperation.

            One need not even appeal to “moral” arguments. Things that destablize societies and diminish cooperation can justifiably be outlawed by a secular government such as ours.

          • Edward Parker

            thankfully our enemy is defeated and those on the wrong side will have plenty of time to share with him in defeat time is short… repent

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            Without a godlly populace, these laws, too, will cease to be enforced, as they already are. For example how many babies in the womb have been tortured and murdered? Millions. Without God’s laws, we risk everyone doing what is right in his own eyes, or as pushed on us by whoever is in power at the moment.

      • Concerned

        If it wasnt for the Bible and Gods eternal word there would be no laws and people would be shot on site out of anger and dislike, woman and daughters would be raped in public, husbands killing wives and getting a pat on the shoulder, Its The 10 Commandments that were the first law, and by which standards for punishment are still held today. You wouldnt not know right from wrong, because man in his entirety is Greedy, Selfish, Hateful and without remorse.

        • Nailz73235

          Thank you for candidly admitting that the only reason you refrain from giving in to your desire to commit all the criminal acts you outline above is because the Ten Commandments are there to forcibly restrain you. I admire your candor.

          • Concerned

            Go ahead and admire away, I am not interested in being a thug or a criminal, by no standards is that ok with anyone. Your comment however shows disregard for anything remotely good and decent. Being a Faithful Christian sets me free from man made bondages of sin, I dont have to lie to anyone, I dont have to hate anyone, I dont have to sleep with one eye open and I definitely dont need to fear what others think. I am happy with my choices. When I do the right thing its not because I want self glorification I do the right thing because its pleasing to my maker.

          • lynn

            Amen!

          • Nailz73235

            I thank you sincerely, Concerned, for your most recent comment, because it clearly lays out your addled, self-contradictory thinking.

            You begin by generously contradicting yourself, saying, “I am not interested in being a thug or a criminal, by no standards is that ok [sic] with anyone.” This, of course, blatantly contradicts your previous comment, in which you argued that only the bible and its commandments serve to control people’s behavior, and prevent them from murdering, raping, torturing, etc. But if thuggishness and criminality is “by no standards…ok [sic] with anyone,” then clearly neither the bible nor the commandments are necessary for moral instincts to guide us.

            Then you drone on in a robotic manner about how being a Christian frees you from “sin,” such as lying, hate, acquiescing to others’ opinions, etc. You cap your tedious sermon by saying, “I do the right thing because its [sic] pleasing to my maker.” Because, of course, you’ve voluntarily enslaved yourself to — and prostrated yourself before — a deity that exists in your imagination but yet who controls your behavior because, you imagine, the deity rules over you. Sad.

            I also have no need of lying. I have no need of hate. I sleep restfully and I care nothing of what others think. I am blissfully happy with my choices. I do that which I deem “right” because it aligns with my values and because I care about my fellow human beings. I don’t do it out of pathetic servility but, rather, because my constitution leads me to behave in ways that align with my values. No need for childish imaginings. No need for pathetic prostration.

          • Concerned

            I have read some of your other comments and now know more about you and why you feel the need to keep this conversation alive. You are reaching out to me for help. Well let me tell you, Omnipotence means having unlimited power, that very same power that raised CHRIST from the Grave, defeating death, not any other god, only Christ, that same power took Christ up into the Heavens where He now sits at the right hand of the Father (because other unbelievers sought to have Him crucified because they too said He was a false prophet). No other god can or has done this, no other god is alive, they are all statues made by people, or bodies in a grave, never resurrected. In the bible when these other gods were called on they did not appear. When God was called on He appeared, He parted the red sea, brought down the walls of Jericho, rained manna from Heaven, took Elijah up whilst he was still alive to Heaven, destroyed all mankind because of their false god worshipping and sexual immorality by reigning down a flood for 40 days and 40 nights, His Spirit made a virgin pregnant without toughing her body. Where has any other God done anything like this. That is and will always be WHY I conform to HIS ways and laws. If you do not have a desire to seek the Lord further, thats ok, I can and shall only have pity for you from here on out. Remember Jesus died for you and He still loves you.

          • Nailz73235

            Although, in your most recent comment, you allege that you’ve “read some of [my] other comments,” I have reason to doubt your literacy — or at least your familiarity with American English — if you drew the conclusion that I was seeking your “help,” which apparently you thought to mean conjuring the fecal blizzard swirling above. My though…what a blizzard it was.

            I appreciate your pity, though. It’s quite a feat to earn pity from the pitiable.

            Hold fast to your fantasies, young one. The childlike enchantment of dreams and magical thinking is something grown-ups look back on wistfully.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “If it wasnt for the Bible and Gods eternal word there would be no laws and people would be shot on site out of anger and dislike, woman and daughters would be raped in public, husbands killing wives and getting a pat on the shoulder”

          If that were the case, then no civilization not based on Christianity would laws. They do. Therefore, your statement is false.

          “Its The 10 Commandments that were the first law, and by which standards for punishment are still held today.”

          Not in the US. Our constitution provides protections that directly violate 8 of the commandments.

          • Concerned

            Well there you go, you answered your own question, No GOD, No LAW and a devastating trail of evidence, innocent people paying for the ignorant mistakes of ignoring the truth. Your words “directly violating 8 of the commandments”. Where has this benefited any Country?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Well there you go, you answered your own question,”

            What question?

            “Where has this benefited any Country?”

            So you don’t believe that the freedom to hold to whatever religious belief you care to, benefits citizens? You don’t believe that free speech benefits citizens? You don’t believe that freedom of association benefits citizens?

            Apparently you are anti-american and anti-freedom. Unfortunate. But, as is protected in our great nation, you are entitled to your opinion. Perhaps you should consider starting your own country based upon a Christian Theocracy. It sounds as though that is what you would prefer.

      • Liz Litts

        Hey badkey-pass the Koolaid–we got another one!

        • Nailz73235

          Liz:

          I commend you for trying to be both humorous and cutting by referencing “Kool-Aid” in response to my comment. You get an A+ for effort. And I sincerely give you kudos for your ambition. I mean…trying to be funny AND to land a jab at the same time? You were swinging for the metaphorical fences!

          Nevertheless, a strike is a strike.

          Try again.

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        And people like you need to accept the FIrst Amendment to the Constitution: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
        free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of
        the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of
        grievances.” People of faith have the right to exercise our faith freely, despite your contempt of that right, according to the Bill of Rights, part of the Constitution.

        • dark477

          not if it violates any of this country’s laws

        • Nailz73235

          Of course you are entitled to the free exercise of your religion, Yvonne. That’s a given in this country, which, as you rightly point out, has a First Amendment that enshrines freedom of worship.

          That’s why Muslims may live in the United States and peacefully practice Islam, Hindus may peacefully practice Hinduism, Scientologists may peacefully practice Scientology, Sikhs may peacefully practice Sikhism, Jews may peacefully practice Judaism, and Christians may peacefully practice Christianity. The First Amendment ensures that legal right.

          There is, however, a difference between (a) an individual practicing his or her faith unencumbered and (b) a state enacting policies that inflict a faith group’s religious doctrine on the general population by force of law. Underpinning secular law with biblical precepts violates the First Amendment because it’s tantamount to establishing a religion, which has been explicitly forbidden.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “People of faith have the right to exercise our faith freely”

          No, they do not. Please note the word “prohibit” in the 1st amendment. That means that the state is not allowed to pass laws which prohibit the exercise of a religious belief. That does not mean that the state cannot place restrictions on the way in which religion is expressed. You are not allowed, for instance, to include human sacrifice as a part of freely exercising your religion. You are not allowed to go out in the street in front of your house at 3:00 am with a bullhorn and start expressing your religious beliefs.

          ‘Prohibiting” and “restricting” are too different things. The constitution does not provide you with protection to exercise your religious beliefs at any time, in any place, and in any way you care to.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            And now you have put your finger on a serious problem. When we bunch all relilgions, both those who bring good and those who bring evil to society into one, we get ourselves into all kinds of confusing messes. That is why life was so much less complicated when we were a Judeo-Christian nation. However, in the case we are speaking of, this lady simply wants to be free to practice her faith of not being forced to participate in something her conscience and the Bible tell her is wrong. She is in no way harming anyone else. On the contrary, they are greatly harming her and apparently loving every minute of it.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            ” When we bunch all relilgions, both those who bring good and those who bring evil to society into one, we get ourselves into all kinds of confusing messes. ”

            Regarding the bringing of “good” or “evil”, that would be based upon your views.

            “That is why life was so much less complicated when we were a Judeo-Christian nation.”

            It was less complicated for Christians. It was more complicated for everyone else. What you are lamenting is that the Christian belief system is no longer being afforded a place of privilege in our laws. You don’t like that you are now being required to share. That you are no longer able to force everyone, through law, to be restricted in their rights based upon your religious beliefs.

            “this lady simply wants to be free to practice her faith of not being forced to participate in something her conscience and the Bible tell her is wrong”

            She isn’t being “forced”. It is her CHOICE to operate a business. It is her CHOICE to offer certain products. There is no “forcing”. As the courts have determined time and again, there is no constitutional protection from anti-discrimination laws based upon religious belief. She is no more allowed to not adhere to the law in this situation than if she turned away an interracial couple and said (as many people do) that it was her religious belief that the races should not mix.

            “She is in no way harming anyone else.”

            Through the Civil Rights Act, as well as subsequent civil rights and anti-discrimination legislation, society as a whole has determined that it is, indeed, harmful to allow discrimination based upon certain traits.

            Listen, I get it. When your viewpoint has been dominate in society for quite some time, it is difficult to see things change. It was easy to champion liberty, freedom, and equality when there was a fairly common belief as to how that would be carried out. As the country has become more diverse, however, standing by those convictions becomes more difficult, as we are required to allow things that may not have been allowed in the past. For instance, I well remember “blue laws” which required that all non-essential businesses be closed on Sunday. Even today, there are locations where sales of alcohol are restricted on Sundays because that is the “Lord’s day”. Thus NO citizens, regardless of faith, are allowed to buy alcohol.

            With that said, if we are truly to embrace and promote the ideas of freedom, liberty, and equality for ALL, then accepting that some things will be legal that we do not personally agree with is part and parcel of that. I cannot expect the state to protect and guarantee my freedom while also wanting them to restrict the freedom of others based solely upon my views being different. What happens if my views are no longer the majority some day? Will it be OK for the new majority to vote to restrict my rights? Is that the type of system you want to live under? Where your rights are not guaranteed, but rather are subject to the whims of the majority at any given time?

            The moment I attempt to justify limiting the freedom of others based upon my beliefs, or even the beliefs of the majority, I put my own freedoms at risk.

            I know that the changes we are going through are difficult for some. But we will get through them, two citizens of the same gender will be legally married, life will go on, and we will be stronger as a nation as we protect and expand the rights of every citizen to pursue their happiness and to be treated equally under the law.

      • Grace Kim Kwon

        You are wrong. The Western Civilization has no morality apart from Christianity. You’ve learned everything humane, civil, and excellent from the Holy Bible. A post-christian society was expected to become immoral, but it should not lose religious liberty, the last sanity left. Endorsement of abnormal immorality like this ensures tyranny against the religious and normal people. The USA is becoming lawless and oppressive like other evil regimes in the past. There is no dignity or freedom in a Sodom. The Founding Fathers and other American forefathers never knew America would become this immoral. This needs to be stopped.

        • Nailz73235

          Thank you sincerely, Grace, for ably demonstrating just the point I had been seeking to make. Although your religious extremism comes in a different flavor as compared to the religious extremism of the theocratic authorities in Saudi Arabia, the diseased thinking at the root of such zealotry is exactly the same.

          Nobody has abridged your religious liberty. You are wholly free to live your life in total submission to your fictional god, prostrating yourself before him and trumpeting his nonsensical moral prescriptions to all who will listen. You are a devout Christian, and you may live a devoutly Christian life.

          When you say, “This needs to be stopped,” however, in reference to what you perceive as immorality, that’s when you enter the realm of dangerous fanaticism. “Religious liberty” does not mean “the power to inflict my delusions upon others, thus forcing them to submit to my moral and religious beliefs.” That’s not liberty but, rather, theocratic tyranny.

          Neither western civilization nor the United States is based upon Christianity or the bible. Look no further than the U.S. Constitution, which makes no mention of the following:
          * The evils of putting any gods before god
          * The evils of idolatry
          * The evils of using god’s name in vain
          * The evils of not honoring the Sabbath
          * The evils of failing to honor one’s parents
          * The evils of adultery
          * The evils of covetousness

          In fact, an individual would have no worry of being arrested or imprisoned even if he did this on a particular Sunday: (a) went to work for six hours; (b) then used the lord’s name in vain several times; (c) then called his parents and spoke disrespectfully to them; (d) then had sexual relations with a married woman; (e) then went home and worshiped an idol.

          Such an individual would have broken no laws and committed no criminal offenses. That’s because our legal system has no biblical foundation.

          Wish as you might that the U.S. were a Christian theocracy, we are not. You have your moral opinions; other people have our moral opinions. Get used to pluralism. It’s not going anywhere.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            America has no morality apart from Christianity. Without Christianity, what you have is only advancement of immorality.

          • Nailz73235

            Your statement presupposes an intrinsic connection between “morality” and “Christianity.” Since you’ve not defended your statement — you’ve merely made an assertion — there is no cause even to acknowledge it.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            No, it’s proven. The Holy Bible has the matchless quality among all philosophies, ideologies and religions in the world. Pre-christian Europe was barbaric and illiterate like the rest and the Church made Europe civil and literate. America was born from the Biblical teachings of freedom and justice. You wouldn’t have any noble concepts if you had no Bible. Christian missionaries rescued the Earthlings all over the world with the life-saving Gospel message and provisions of charity. Today’s post-christian Western culture is just worthlessly immoral and hedonistic, worse than pagan civilizations. You need Christianity to be saved and also to become moral and civil. America has nothing good or worthy apart from Christianity.

          • Nailz73235

            Grace:

            Although I actually have read the bible, and I’m quite familiar with non-biblical Christian writings, I distinguish myself from you by the fact that I’ve ALSO read history books and, thus, I’m well acquainted with the facts that you so badly mangle. Now, I do not argue that Christianity has ONLY been deleterious to humanity; it has served some useful purposes. But it’s utterly laughable to pretend, as you do, that all that is good is rooted in, and creditable to, the Christian religion.

            Christianity and its bible have historically been, and continue to be, one of the principal sources of scientific illiteracy on this planet. Whether it was biblical inerrantists’ frantic attempts to squelch the Copernican Revolution or their continued dogged refusal to accept our common Darwinian ancestry, your fundamentalist peers have impeded and obstructed the spread of knowledge. Indeed, many, including myself, would credit the strength of Western civilization to The Age of Enlightenment from the mid-1650s until nearly 1800 — not to your deluded ancestral salvation peddlers.

            It seems clear that nobody is going to disabuse you of your deep-seated religious inculcation and, candidly, I don’t care enough to try. But, as you tediously trumpet the moral virtue of the bible, I cannot help but to think of the palpable absurdity the book contains…absurdity that’s of a piece with the ignorant time that birthed the cobbled-together tome. The bible condemns a number of gravely sinful acts that do not, in actuality, even exist, such as the practice of “sorcery.” And, centuries ago, women were tortured and executed for “witchcraft,” which also, in reality, does not exist.

            I do not cite those examples to argue that the bible is morally reprehensible but, rather, to argue that the bible is preposterous…replete with laughable ignorance and foolishness. You may hold up such ignorance and foolishness as a moral beacon from which we’ve turned away. I, however, recognize the vanquishment of nonsense as a virtue.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are a typical Western fool. First of all, the Christian religion is the only civilized and evidential ideology among all. The Christendom alone developed scientific thinking because of Reformation and systematic theology. All pioneer scientists were Christian and Christian minded or theistic including even people like Darwin and Einstein. I read the Western philosophies but they were just branches or applications from the good Christian religion; you didn’t notice it because you grew up in it and do not remember how profound the Holy Bible is. No one beats Apostle Paul in the depth. The Western Civilization abolished the world’s barbarism because it had Christianity. You secularists are harmful parasites that the Christians tolerate and you contributed only in polluting the Planet Earth. The Westerners of yesteryears were humane when they respected Christianity their only conscience; today you are wasting yourselves by promoting heinous immorality which even the pagans abhor because your life without Christianity is altogether meaningless. You guys are a typical case of rotten kids who repay good parents with evil. One should be happy not to have the likes of you as descendants. You need to be humble before your Creator God and repent of all your sins to get saved.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            You are a typical Western fool. First of all, the Christian religion is the only civilized and evidential ideology among all. The Christendom alone developed scientific thinking because of Reformation and systematic theology. All pioneer scientists were Christian and Christian minded or theistic including even people like Darwin and Einstein. I read the Western philosophies but they were just branches or applications from the good Christian religion; you didn’t notice it because you grew up in it and do not remember how profound the Holy Bible is. No one beats Apostle Paul in the depth. The Western Civilization abolished the world’s barbarism because it had Christianity. You secularists are harmful parasites that the Christians tolerate and you contributed only in polluting the Planet Earth. The Westerners of yesteryears were humane when they respected Christianity their only conscience; today you are wasting yourselves by promoting heinous immorality which even the pagans abhor because your life without Christianity is altogether meaningless. You guys are a typical case of rotten kids who repay good parents with evil. One should be happy not to have the likes of you as descendants. You need to be humble before your Creator God and repent of all your sins to get saved.

          • Nailz73235

            You know, Grace, I am increasingly coming to realize that this discourse is not really a conversation but, rather, a case of me patiently responding to the assorted sermons with which you’ve been programmed only for you, in response, to take the same tack yet again: mindlessly repeating your ideological talking points as though they were veracious. Clearly, whoever inculcated you with this excremental ideology found, in you, a ready and willing receptacle.

            Your assertion that the Christian religion is both civilized and civilizing is precisely that: an assertion. You’ve failed even to do the elementary work of defining your terms, most likely because, if you had, the circular nature of your pitiable reasoning would have been laid bare: Christianity is the only “civilizing” ideology because, by definition, only societies in which Christianity reigns are “civilized.” And the notion that the Christian religion birthed scientific thinking is palpable idiocy, inasmuch as, for many centuries, your bible-centered fellows and you have donned the raiment of obscurantism; you’ve sought to obstruct and undermine people’s scientific knowledge of a heliocentric solar system, universal common descent, a universe and an Earth whose ages are in the billions of years, and countless other scientific truths.

            Your reference to Darwin and Einstein are particularly amusing given that neither subscribed to anything remotely approaching Christianity during the time of their scientific work. And, amazingly, you actually betray your own evangelical fanaticism by throwing in “or theistic” when referring to scientists’ supposed religious grounding. A deist is not interchangeable with a Jew, who is not interchangeable with a Christian.

            Once again, you may trumpet the unequaled virtue and peerless profundity of the bible—as well as its alleged capacity to extirpate barbarism—but the facts inconveniently subvert your inept, tiresome preachment. As noted in my previous reply, the bible strongly condemns “wicked acts” that do not actually exist (e.g., sorcery and witchcraft), and it’s historically inspired people to torture and execute individuals accused of performing such non-existent acts. The bible’s been used to underpin male dominance over females, to persecute homosexuals and to impose invented rules of sexual morality on human society. What you call virtuous, I call deleterious. What you call profound, I call fatuous.

            Finally, I take no offense to you redundantly calling my ideological peers and me “harmful parasites” who pollute the Earth because, in truth, we don’t perceive you all that much more positively. Your fellow zealots and you waste your lives in perpetual prostration before a non-existent deity, and you slavishly adhere to the moral and behavioral prescriptions contained in a dusty, cobbled-together tome written by ignorant men of antiquity whose bafflement with the natural order was matched only by the crudeness of their sense of virtue and vice.

            You’re a walking, talking curiosity, Grace. You’re a relic of a time when men were unlettered; the world was confounding and fearsome; and rational, enlightened reasoning had yet to supersede primitive magical thinking. And, as a curiosity, you’re endearing in your own kooky way.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            What you said is false. You Westerners are barbaric and illiterate like the rest if you had no Christian Church. Your civilization is screwed again because you abandoned Christianity. This time, the world will not be ordered around by you because you are too sick immoral. Pre-christian = barbarism. Post-christian = mentally ill with abnormal immorality. You need Christianity for truth, liberty, justice, and civility.

          • Nailz73235

            And with that, Grace, I’m afraid our colloquy has come to an end. As I intimated previously, it seems that your cognitive deficiencies are such that you are genuinely unable to read, understand, reflect on and forthrightly address the various points I make in response to your inept attempts to extol the Christian religion.

            I make specific, pointed critiques of your feeble arguments, and you respond by blithely dismissing those critiques and repeating lines of “argument” that form a perfect circle:

            (*) Christianity is, by definition, the only civilizing ideology because, by definition, only Christian societies are civilized.

            (*) Christianity is, by definition, the only morally upright belief system because, by definition, only Christian societies are moral.

            (*) Pre-Christian societies are, by definition, barbaric, because barbarism is defined as the absence of Christianity.

            (*) Post-Christian societies are, by definition, mentally ill, because mental illness is defined as the rejection of Christianity.

            In my many years conversing with innumerable Christian interlocutors, I have found very few whose Christian apologetics — and whose attempts at evangelism — are as inept, bumbling and incompetent as yours are. Although your profile calls you “a Christian homeschooler,” I now take that to mean “a Christian home-schooled student,” because, surely, only a child could put forward such inanity and, somehow, mistake it for reasoning.

          • Grace Kim Kwon

            No, it’s proven. You didn’t read the Holy Bible or Christian writings of your ancestors; that’s why you have no idea. The Holy Bible has the matchless quality among all philosophies, ideologies and religions in the world. Pre-christian Europe was barbaric and illiterate like the rest but the Christian Church made Europe civil and literate. That’s why the Western Civilization was outstanding superior; it had the copies of the Holy Bible first. America was born from the Biblical principle of freedom and justice. America would not have any noble ideas if it had no Bible. Christian missionaries rescued the Earthlings all over the world with the life-saving Gospel messsage and provisions of Christian charity. Today’s post-christian Western culture is just worthlessly hedonistic and immoral, worse than pagan civilizations. You ned Christianity to get saved and become moral and civil. America is worthless without Christianity.

          • Nailz73235

            Although I actually have read the bible, Grace, and I’m quite familiar with non-biblical Christian writings, I distinguish myself from you by the fact that I’ve ALSO read history books and, thus, I’m well acquainted with the facts that you so badly mangle. Now, I do not argue that Christianity has ONLY been deleterious to humanity; it has served some useful purposes. But it’s utterly laughable to pretend, as you do, that all that is good is rooted in, and creditable to, the Christian religion.

            Christianity and its bible have historically been, and continue to be, one of the principal sources of scientific illiteracy on this planet. Whether it was biblical inerrantists’ frantic attempts to squelch the Copernican Revolution or their continued dogged refusal to accept our common Darwinian ancestry, your fundamentalist peers have impeded and obstructed the spread of knowledge. Indeed, many, including myself, would credit the strength of Western civilization to The Age of Enlightenment from the mid-1650s until nearly 1800 — not to your deluded ancestral salvation peddlers.

            It seems clear that nobody is going to disabuse you of your deep-seated religious inculcation and, candidly, I don’t care enough to try. But, as you tediously trumpet the moral virtue of the bible, I cannot help but to think of the palpable absurdity the book contains…absurdity that’s of a piece with the ignorant time that birthed the cobbled-together tome. The bible condemns a number of gravely sinful acts that do not, in actuality, even exist, such as the practice of “sorcery.” And, centuries ago, women were tortured and executed for “witchcraft,” which also, in reality, does not exist.

            I do not cite those examples to argue that the bible is morally reprehensible but, rather, to argue that the bible is preposterous…replete with laughable ignorance and foolishness. You may hold up such ignorance and foolishness as a moral beacon from which we’ve turned away. I, however, recognize the vanquishment of nonsense as a virtue.

  • Badkey

    Smart fella… Religion has no bearing on US law.

    • Ray Watson

      EACH LIFE SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO GOD AND ALL HIS LAWS OBEYED TO THE DEATH

      • Badkey

        Why are you screaming?

        • piejon

          I think he is, I can’t hear!

      • piejon

        Rubbish.

  • Linda Brant-Lynn

    Badkey…God’s laws trumph man made laws.

    • Nailz73235

      Actually, no, they do not. The U.S. Constitution is the supreme governing document in this country. The bible, and the god in it, has no legal recognition in our pluralistic, secular constitutional republic.

      • Liz Litts

        Well that’s fine for all the Koolaid drinkers–But their is a higher law and Christians are bound to obey God rather than man

        • Badkey

          ALLUAH AKBAR!

          • hangman

            Another moron waving above the crowd showing his ignorance. Yes, we see you now go shout in the corner..

        • lynn

          I had much rather go with God!

          • piejon

            Well, go.

        • dark477

          And you have the nerve to call us Koolaid drinkers? the only thing you’re call on is to pay your taxes and obey the laws and mean the laws of America not your fake god.

          • Concerned

            People like you are the reason there are Christians? Someone needs to shed light on the truth and explain what happens if you don’t come to Salvation. My eternity is set in Heaven, we are all going to die someday, that is a guarantee and you will spend an eternity somewhere, if its not in Heaven its not going to be in a meadow with pretty colours and lots of grass, with everyone frolicking and dancing around under the warm of the sun either. That dark477 is the reality of this conversation, the living under Jesus’ laws and the Bible is what makes it all possible in the end. Obeying the Laws of America or China or England or any other country is what makes that country safe and acceptable for all who live in it.

        • BarkingDawg

          Then emigrate.

        • Nailz73235

          Just like Muslims are bound to obey Allah rather than man? Just like Pastifarians are bound to obey the Flying Spaghetti Monster rather than man?

          Well, at least you find yourself in interesting company…. I wish you well as you find your eventual path to reality-based thinking.

          • RealityBetraysUs

            “Pastifarians are bound to obey the Flying Spaghetti Monster ” I guess this is just another way to look at people and their religion of choice “the apple does not fall far from the tree” and that was not a ref. to adam and eve. Does the Flying Spaghetti Monster have punishments and rewards ?

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          Then that is what you should do Liz. If a woman asks you to marry her, you should say no. Done and done.

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        Sorry to tell you this, but the Constitution was based on the Bible, which, of course, is part of the reason progressives and atheists are trying to do away with it. Parts they can’t twist and make say the opposite of what it means, they want to eliminate. Bad idea. It worked for hundreds of years, making America the greatest country ever. Sad to see it go downhill so fast.

        • dark477

          and do you have any proof?

        • BarkingDawg

          No, it was based on English Common Law.

          Which was based on centuries of legal jurisprudence.

        • Nailz73235

          Yvonne:

          What I’m about to say might sound a little…well…harsh, so please allow me to preface my comment by saying that I sincerely do not mean to offend you. So, please, take my words in the spirit in which they’re offered: a spirit of helpfulness.

          Most of the time, when people say things that are just head-scratchingly, jaw-droppingly wrong, they’re not actually sharing their own thoughts; they are regurgitating the misinformation that others have fed them over the years. I suspect that’s exactly what you were doing when you said “the Constitution [is] based on the bible.” Surely, nothing so wrongheaded could come from an earnest, sincere person like you seem to be.

          The Constitution contains no references to a creator of any kind, let alone to the Christian god or to Jesus. It contains no scriptural references or scriptural allusions. It contains no legal prohibitions that would be the hallmarks of a document based upon the bible: for example, proscribing having any other gods before the Christian god; proscribing idolatry; proscribing using the lord’s name in vain; proscribing the failure to remember the Sabbath day; proscribing the failure to honor your parents; proscribing adultery; or proscribing covetousness.

          What the Constitution does contain, however, is a codification of freedom of religion, and a prohibition against the government ever establishing an official religion (i.e., making our secular country a “Christian nation”). And thank god for that!

          So, again, Yvonne, I offer this advice in the spirit of friendship and reconciliation: stop listening to whoever is feeding you the nonsense you’ve been repeating to us. Look at the facts yourself, and come to recognize what is true and what is false.

          All the best.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            My apologies. I was thinking of the Declaration of Independence, written earlier, July 4, 1776. It states, in part:

            “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,”

            This is not happening in America today. Some states, for example, have had their citizens vote against homosexual marriages at a rate of over 80%, yet the Feds and their courts stuffed with liberals and progressives, with no concern for what the people want, bully and coerce and destroy the livelihood of those who woud follow their Creator’s design for marriage. This is called tyranny, my friend.

          • Nailz73235

            Actually, Yvonne, what is tyrannical is to subject a free people to the tyranny of the majority, by which their liberty is restricted by the whims of others. By all means, you as an American citizen are empowered to enjoy freedom of religion. You may live a good Christian life, adhering strictly to biblical behavioral prescriptions in your private conduct. However, in a pluralistic, secular constitutional republic, the notion that biblical precepts can make their way into American law is wholly improper…not to mention flagrantly unconstitutional.

            It is not “tyranny” to prevent you — and those of a like mind — from obstructing “Bob” and “Joe” from getting married. On the contrary, it would be tyranny to subject “Bob” and “Joe’s” constitutional rights to a majority vote by a hostile majority population.

            A pluralistic, secular constitutional republic does not recognize “a creator’s design for marriage,” since sectarian religious thought carries no weight in such a constitutional scheme.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            OK, let’s walk away from homosexual marriages for a moment, and I will speak to you on a more personal level. After many years of schooling, my husband became a pharmacist. For many years, all went well. Then ten or so years ago, WA State decided pharmacists had to sell the day after abortion pill. As Christians, my husband and I made the decision to retire instead of being forced to violate our conscience and the Word of God by killing an innocent child. You people say, well, just get another job. Sure, go be a janitor or dig ditches. That is what happened in Communist Russia. If that seems fair to you, then you truly are unjust.

          • Nailz73235

            Although I sympathize with those whose jobs put them at odds with their moral values, I see no injustice in giving people in that situation a choice: either perform the responsibilities that your job entails, or find a job whose responsibilities you are willing to perform.

            Although you, as a Christian, might find the use of the morning-after pill morally unacceptable, that gives you no basis on which to deny a legal, FDA-approved drug to somebody who seeks it and who is entitled to obtain it. What is unjust, from my standpoint, is to pretend as though your personal, religion-derived moral values ought to affect anyone but you, such as by denying the morning-after pill to another person, to whom your moral values are inapplicable.

            I might generously concede, however, that a pharmacist might be entitled not to provide a legal, FDA-approved drug like the morning after pill if — and only if — that pharmacist ensured that his/her customer received the drug by another means, such as from another local pharmacist, with no delay and minimal inconvenience.

            In short, I am more concerned with the customer’s rights than with the pharmacist’s right to refuse to provide basic services.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Nothing of the sort happened in Communist Russia.

            “If that seems fair to you”

            How do you define “fair”? Is it fair that a woman who wants that drug, and is legally able to procure it, is turned away because of your husband’s personal religious beliefs?

            Would it be fair for your husband to demand proof of marriage for a person buying condoms? Did you husband have his own pharmacy or was he employed by a company?

            Is it fair for an employer to have employees simply refuse to perform their jobs but have no recourse regarding retaining that employee?

            Would it be “fair” for your husband to demand that he continue to be employed even though he refuses to do what his employer tells him to do? How is that “fair” to the employer?

            Would it be “fair” to the employer to have to hire an additional employee to fill the prescriptions your husband does not want to fill? How about birth control pills? Is it fair for your husband to demand that his employer continue his employment despite refusing to fulfill the responsibilities of his job?

            You seem to define “fair” as being you getting what you want at the expense of others. How exactly is that “fair”?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Some states, for example, have had their citizens vote against homosexual marriages at a rate of over 80%”

            Well, that would not be exactly accurate. It’s important to have a complete understanding of the numbers. Let’s look at the most recent vote in North Carolina.

            There are 6,296,759 registered voters in NC. Of that, 2,157,980 voted on amendment 1 – 34.66%. Of that, 1,317,178 (61% of the votes cast) favored Amendment 1; 840,802 (39%) voted against. The measure passed by 476,376 votes, which represents 7.5% of the registered voters in NC.

            So, in summary, 7.5% of the registered voters in NC were responsible for deciding that two citizens of the same gender should not be allowed access to a right that is provided by the state. Hardly the will of the people.

            “yet the Feds and their courts stuffed with liberals and progressives”

            Many in the judiciary that have ruled against laws prohibiting same-gender marriage were appointed by conservative presidents based upon the conservative view points of the individuals.

            “with no concern for what the people want”

            Under our system of government, the people do not have the ability to enforce laws which restrict the rights of citizens based solely on a vote to do so. We do not live in a pure democracy. We live in a constitutional republic.

            Do you believe that citizens should NOT have the right to challenge the constitutionality of laws in court and that the judiciary should NOT be empowered to rule on the constitutionality of laws? Would you prefer that the majority, through their vote, can restrict the rights of the minority?

            “bully and coerce and destroy the livelihood of those who would follow their Creator’s design for marriage.”

            Please CHOOSE to open a business and they CHOOSE what services they will offer. No one is coerced to operate a business or to offer certain products. If someone doesn’t like the rules regarding operating a business, then they should not open one. They are also free to work to get the laws changed so that they can use their religious beliefs as a reason for discrimination.

            Since opening and operating a business is a choice, and no one is forced to do so, that is not tyranny.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            In Alabama, for example, 85% of the vote was against homosexual marriage. Utah also had high amounts, as did other states. When states repeatedly vote against homosexual marriages and the FEDs make a law (unconstitutional, since this should be a state affair) forcing homosexual marriages on the populace, thereby invalidating what the populace worked hard to secure, and then force people to either submit or lose their livelihood and life sayings, this is my definition of tyranny.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “and the FEDs make a law”

            What law is it you believe the “FEDs” have made?

            “forcing homosexual marriages on the populace”

            Since you aren’t required to marry a woman, nor is any other citizen required to marry someone of the same gender, homosexual marriage is not being “forced” on anyone.

            “thereby invalidating what the populace worked hard to secure,”

            Voting is not hard. I’ll ask again:

            Do you believe that citizens should NOT have the right to challenge the constitutionality of laws in court and that the judiciary should NOT be empowered to rule on the constitutionality of laws? Would you prefer that the majority, through their vote, can restrict the rights of the minority?

            “then force people to either submit or lose their livelihood and life sayings”

            Simply false. Complete hyperbole

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            You do not appear to be very well informed of what is going on in the US today. And yes, it is hard to spend hundreds of hours working on getting an initiative and the signatures required, then the votes required to pass the initiative by the people, for example, outlawing homosexual marriage in their state, just to have the FEDs overrule it by Federal judges that are pro-homosexual rights and appear to be indifferent to the rights of people, such as the lady in WA State who just lost her job because she would not provide flowers for a homosexual couple, and not only her job, but they were allowed to go after her personally, as well. She will lose her home and savings if they have their way. I wish this were hyperbole. It is not. Freedom of religion is in danger of extinction, on the altar of special rights for perversion, abortion, and other dangerous life-styles.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “such as the lady in WA State who just lost her job because she would not provide flowers for a homosexual couple, and not only her job, but they were allowed to go after her personally, as well. ”

            She didn’t lose her job. Her shop is still open.

            “She will lose her home and savings if they have their way.”

            The state offered to settle for $2,000. She refused.

            “Freedom of religion is in danger of extinction,”

            the ability to refuse service based upon religious beliefs has been in place since 1964. People still have the freedom to choose what faith to follow. Freedom of religion is not “in danger of extinction”. That is hyperbole. Freedom of religion is guaranteed in our constitution.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            I hope you watched this lady on The Kelley File last night. Maybe it will change your mind. Or maybe not, if you have an agendy. Freedom of religion is not freedom at all if one is not allowed to practice it. Great freedom she was offered. If she would pay $2000 and agree to henceforth sell flowers to homosexuals, she would not be put out of business, lose her home, and her life savings. Assuming you have a conscience, put yourself in her place and think of something you strongly believe in–a God-given principle that has been in effect throughout human history. Then suddenly, a class that disagrees with that policy takes power, becomes protected and you and everyone else must go against your principles and do whatever it is they ask of you. Oh, but it is OK because you will only be fined $2000 and forced to continue doing it or lose everything you have worked for during the last 25 years. Nice laws we have here in America. Pure justice.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Freedom of religion is not freedom at all if one is not allowed to practice it.”

            Please, spare me the hyperbole. She is free to practice her religion within the confines of the free. There is nothing in the practice of her religion that forbids her from making a flower arrangement for a same-gender wedding. Freedom of religion does not mean that you are able to do whatever you want, when ever you want, where ever you want, nor in any setting you want. That has never been the case.

            “agree to henceforth sell flowers to homosexuals”

            She already did that. She is free to operate a florist shop but not provide wedding flowers as one of her services.

            “she would not be put out of business, lose her home, and her life savings.”

            Again, spare me the hyperbole. None of those things are happening. If she doesn’t want to do flowers for a same-gender wedding, then all she has to do is stop offering arrangements for weddings. This whole “she is forced to do this or she will be put out of business, lose her home, and her life savings” is simply a lie.

            If I don’t like the laws that govern business, then I shouldn’t open a business. Or, if I do open a business, then I should decide what services/products I offer that will not result in my doing something that is against my beliefs.

            But I do not have the right to open a business, offer certain things, be aware of the law, break the law, and then expect that I can throw up my religious beliefs as some type of shield. Owners couldn’t do it when they said they didn’t want to serve black people because they believed the bible said the races should not mix, and it doesn’t work today.

            She is free to believe as she likes. She is not free to CHOOSE to operate a business and CHOOSE to offer certain services but then expect not to be held accountable for breaking the law.

            If you need further explanation of this, please see United States v Lee.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “Sorry to tell you this, but the Constitution was based on the Bible”

          What parts of the constitution were based upon the Bible, and in what way?

          Our constitution provides protections that are in direct conflict with 7 out of the 10 commandments. How is it reasonable, therefore, to say that our constitution was based on the bible?

          “Sad to see it go downhill so fast.”

          In what ways to believe the country is going “downhill”?

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            I was raised in the 60s. Education, as shown by SAT scores were higher then than any time in history. Economically, we were sound, with no $17 trillion dollar debt over our head. Crime was a fraction what it is today. So little violence and theft that we didn’t even lock our doors. Marriages were much healthier and divorce rare. Nearlly half the population was not on food stamps. We could worship God without being called names and have to fear reprisals for our faith, or having our church burned down, for the nation’s laws were still based on the Bible. Pornography did not run rampant. Autism and other diseases did not plague our population. I am so thankful I grew up before God and His laws began to be removed from the public square, and I fear for my children and grandchildren who are growing up in a world so devoid of morality and God’s will for our lives.

          • Robert H.

            Then thank your parents. It would be your beloved generation with the highest SAT score, that F^cked everything up

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Education, as shown by SAT scores were higher then than any time in history. ”

            SAT scores on the Verbal scale have dropped, although I am unaware of any correlation between that and any changes that you reference. Most likely it is due to the increase in communication electronically, rather than anything else. Math scores, on the other hand, have risen since the 60s.

            “Economically, we were sound, with no $17 trillion dollar debt over our head.”

            Debt is relative to GDP, which has never been higher. Your scenario would be like saying that because I have a $300,000 mortgage today, I am in worst economic shape then when I owned a different home with a $100,000 mortgage 20 years ago. That would not be a reasonable conclusion.

            “Crime was a fraction what it is today.”

            Crime rates have dropped dramatically over the past 20 years.

            “We could worship God without being called names and have to fear reprisals for our faith, or having our church burned down, for the nation’s laws were still based on the Bible.”

            People have always been called names. What churches have been burned down lately? The last ones I know of where in the South that were burned down by racists, and that was many decades ago.

            While some of the nation’s laws are in concert with the teachings of the bible, our laws have never been based solely upon the Bible. Our constitution provides protections that directly conflict with 8 out of the 10 commandments.

            “Pornography did not run rampant.”

            Pornography has always been a part of society.

            “I fear for my children and grandchildren who are growing up in a world so devoid of morality and God’s will for our lives.”

            That responsibility falls upon you and their parents. It is not the job of society or the government to school your grandchildren in the Christian belief system.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            No point answering all your incorrect premises. For example, since math scores have improved so much the last 20 years, you should know that the difference between 1962, which is the year I mentioned, and 2015 is not 20 years.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            You never mentioned “1962”. You said the “60s”. That is a decade.

            “should know that the difference between 1962, which is the year I mentioned, and 2015 is not 20 years.”

            I never said it was.

            “No point answering all your incorrect premises.”

            What premises are incorrect? If you are going to make the accusation at least have enough integrity to back it up.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            See how pointless to try and have a meaningful discussion with you. The top SAT levels were in 1962. But even if it were 1969 I were refering to, the difference between 1969 and 2015 is 46, not 20, years. I make it a point not to argue with foolish people. ‘Nuff said.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            My comment: “Crime rates have dropped dramatically over the past 20 years.”

            I was not referring to SAT scores. You referenced the current state of the nation and brought up crime as an issue. I noted that crime rates have dropped dramatically over the past 20 years. They are still above levels in the 60s, but they are much better than they were, which is indicative of improving, not deteriorating, trends.

            I’ll ask again:

            What premises are incorrect? If you are going to make the accusation at least have enough integrity to back it up.

            What is foolish is to make accusations that you are unable to back up.

      • hangman

        Funny, the Creator is mentioned in that document. He is also mentioned 5 times in the document that we refer to as The Declaration of Independence. There there is Washington’s mention of Christ and the moral foundation that this country was founded upon and once that moral foundation was removed there is no more America. So, you are very much wrong and lack knowledge of the history of our founding. My ancestor who signed one of these documents was a very devout Christian. Without the Bible we would not have a Constitution that said that our rights come from God not man. So, you should do some research than lead yourself and others astray. Come to Washington, D.C. and visit all the monuments and buildings that invoke God has being supreme over us and our Constitution. I guess you will find out the hard way as our country moves away from God’s principles and we go down further the abyss because of lawlessness and ignorant foolish men like yourself.

        • BarkingDawg

          The DoI has no legal weight.

        • Jeff Robison

          And is God mentioned even once in the Constitution?

          Try not to get your ‘history’ from people like David Barton, eh?

        • Nailz73235

          Hangman: I have to say, there are very few things I get a bigger kick out of than when an interlocutor firmly plants his flag in what he believes to be solid terrain, only too soon to realize that he’s actually planted it in quicksand. You did just that when you (falsely) alleged that a creator is mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. Of course, there are no constitutional references to a creator, god, Jesus or anything of the sort. So, basically, you’ve made yourself look like a fool.

          You doubled down on foolishness by proceeding to invoke the Declaration of Independence, as well as words spoken by certain of the Founding Fathers and invocations of the deity at monuments and buildings. Why were you being foolish in so doing? Because the Declaration of Independence is no more a governing document affecting contemporary American government than the Articles of Confederation are. Our government does not operate in accordance with the Declaration of Independence; it operates in accordance with the Constitution.

          Finally, you say, “Without the Bible we would not have a Constitution that said that our rights come from God not man.” Well, since our Constitution does not say that — or anything resembling that — I guess we are, in fact, “without the bible.”

          Fool.

          • Concerned

            Oh wow this comment truly truly astounds me. I pray before you leave this earth to your “eternity” which is a sure thing, that you and your views will have changed and found “Salvation”. IF We Christians are fools, so be it “Id rather be a live fool than a dead one”

          • Nailz73235

            Your tedious sermonizing does nothing to ameliorate Hangman’s offense against truthfulness and cogent thought. Also, I did not say that Christians are fools but, rather, that Hangman is a fool, by virtue of having written foolish things. Certainly, not all Christians are fools. They — and you — are just wrong.

          • RealityBetraysUs

            http://www.renewthemindministries.com/home/911-in-prophecyl-gods-judgment/ God was telling us after 911 repent and turn from your false Gods or he will judge America for her sins. It is no coincidence the 911 occurred where it did because the little church house and gov building next to one of the fallen buildlings was were this country had it’s first inauguration and we vowed to follow God as a Christian nation when George Washington was inuagurated. God is merely telling America keep your promise to God or God will remove his protection and then will come judgment just like the nation of Israel was judged by God.

          • Nailz73235

            I mean…sure…one can impute intentionality to all sorts of things. One can say that a hurricane devastated a particular city because god sought to judge that city. One can say that a terrorist act destroyed a particular building, or struck a particular area, because that building or that area held particular significance to a vengeful god. One can play this game in perpetuity if one wishes.

            The problem is, there is no reason to credit one interpretation over another. If we’re going to pursue this line of thinking, perhaps the 9/11 attacks were successful because Allah is the supreme deity and Allah ensured that the terrorist attack was not thwarted. Why not proffer that theory?

            Want further evidence that, perhaps, Allah is actually the supreme deity? From 1910 to 2010, Christians as a percentage of the global population decreased from 34.8 percent to 32.8 percent. Muslims as a percentage of the global population, by contrast, increased from 12.6 percent to 22.5 percent.

            Clearly, Allah is ensuring the rapid and efficacious spread of Islam, right?

          • RealityBetraysUs

            no it just means like the Catholics they do not practise birth control. In western societies where you are held financially accountable for offspring you create you have to have the money to bring into this world excessive progeny. Surely you saw the scene from the Monty Pythom film the meaning of life where they compared the Catholic home with a guy and his 100 children, versus the protestant home were the man only had one or two children all because the freedom of t he Church brought about by Martin Luther allows the man to use birth control, so the protestants do not have hundreds of unplanned children! God has nothing to do with the number of children created that is our own stupidty. You can not blame God for man’s own stupidity!

          • hangman

            Read the document and when you read the word Creator and inalienable rights……Stupid people who never read nor understand the document. You should demand a refund from the public school system Johnny….

          • Nailz73235

            And you CONTINUE to confuse the Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution. Amazing….

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “Without the Bible we would not have a Constitution that said that our rights come from God not man.”

          The constitution doesn’t say that.

          “Come to Washington, D.C. and visit all the monuments and buildings that invoke God has being supreme over us and our Constitution. ”

          What buildings and monuments invoke the Christian god as being supreme over us and our constitution?

          • Concerned

            I dont think you are reading the correct Bible or have the correct laws that govern your constitution. The Almighty God has the supreme right as invoked through Creation to Reign over mankind and his constitution.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “I dont think you are reading the correct Bible or have the correct laws that govern your constitution. ”

            The constitution I am referring to is the Constitution of the US. Which one are you referring to?

            “The Almighty God has the supreme right as invoked through Creation to Reign over mankind and his constitution.”

            While you are certainly free to believe that is true, that belief is not a basis for our laws.

          • hangman

            You do not know the principles as to how the Constitution was written or how our government or Republic was formed. What sets us apart is that we as a nation under our Creator has formed a self governing society. We put God as that which endowed us with inalienable rights that only He can take, not man. Get it? With ever generation less and less understands this simple fact. So, yes the Constitution does say this but you were never taught or not intelligent enough to understand. It is what sets us upon clearly from communist countries who believe only in the state and not God…..

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “We put God as that which endowed us with inalienable rights that only He can take, not man. Get it? ”

            Please note that the D0I uses the generic term “Creator” not “Christian God”.

            “a Constitution that said that our rights come from God not man.”

            Where does the constitution say that?

            I’ll ask again: What buildings and monuments invoke the Christian god as being supreme over us and our constitution?

      • Concerned

        Have you even read your Declaration of Independence whereby the Law of the country is enforced? Reference to God the “CREATOR” is mentioned more than once. One more thing what constitutes marriage more than procreation, How does one share in the natural blessing of Children? .

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          “Have you even read your Declaration of Independence whereby the Law of the country is enforced?”

          Law is not enforced via the DoI. It is via the constitution.

          “How does one share in the natural blessing of Children? .”

          How does a couple who is past childbearing years do so? How is a couple where one of the are infertile?

        • Nailz73235

          The Declaration of Independence is completely irrelevant to public policy within, and the legal organization of, the United States of America. Whether something comports with or violates the Declaration of Independence is of no consequence. The U.S. Constitution is the blueprint of our government.

          What constitutes marriage is the union of people who love each other and wish to be legally wed. Procreation and the raising of children are both incidental, and they’re relevant only to families that seek to procreate.

    • Badkey

      Good luck with that.

      It’s nice to see you support Sharia law.

      • Liz Litts

        you don’t know what you’re talking about!

        • Badkey

          Yeah… I do.

          The only difference is degrees. Both mythologies are the same.

          • hangman

            And your mythology that God does not exist? You have no proof but all around is a creation, a design known by many…God does not show or share Himself with everyone, just a chosen few. You see rather in the dark.

          • Badkey

            Allah did well, huh?

          • hangman

            Allah is Satan…

      • David Allen

        Yet you liberals support Sharia Law

      • bowie1

        Wrong religion. Sharia Law is associated with Islam.

        • Badkey

          No difference except balls.

          • hangman

            No Christian will demand your death you ignorant fool. That is for God to hand to you, and hand to you He will.

          • BarkingDawg

            No Christian will demand your death. . . .

            You aren’t that familiar with the history of the Christianity, then are you?

          • Frank

            He probably is and you are not refering to Christian history but to Satan’s history in sheep’s clothing meant to Decieve.

          • BarkingDawg

            So satan is responsible for the crusades, the Salem witch trials, the st. Bartholomew’s day massacre, the holocaust, slavery, the persecution of LGBT, etc.

            I thought it was all devout Christians that did that

          • Fnord_Farseer

            My, look at all those nifty strawman talking points. Did you stuff them all by yourself, or did you get them cheap at a Farmers’ market? I’m leaning toward the latter, though.

          • BarkingDawg

            Whoosh.

            The sarcasm went right over your head.

          • Concerned

            Yes yes yes and yes again. Where do you see normal, decent people doing the things Hitler did, do you know what the Crusades were about? What is your version of Devout Christians? Not everyone who isnt a satanist or atheist or muslim is a Christian. It only comes by accepting Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour.

          • Frank

            Yes. They were not done by Christians.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            At the time, they all claimed to be Christians and claimed they were following the Bible. But you are saying, that in retrospect, they were not, is that correct?

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Interesting. Who is responsible for the Crusades and the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre?

          • Frank

            Wasn’t. Christians. Just because someone claims to be one doesn’t make them so.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            I see. So your solution for the Who Killed Who conundrum is to white-wash the record whenever it is a non-Catholic Christian who might be implicated in wrongdoing. No True Scotsman.

          • Frank

            Scotsman and any worldly logic have nothing to do with Jesus who is the Logos of God and Christians who have the mind of Christ the Logos of God. The foolishness of God is wiser than the wisest of any Scotsman or worldly wisdom and thought.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Indeed, Christ is the Divine Logos. However, denigrating logic as “worldly wisdom” does not permit you to abuse history for your own polemical purpose. Fundies are fond of pulling this tactic but it will not work on me.

          • Frank

            Logic as the world turns is nothing more than worldy wisdom. Brain power. Worldy. Carnal. Just because someone claims to be a Christian in no way makes them one. As shown in James – actions matter to being genuine or not.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Again, more excuses and deflection. This kind of anti-intellectual rhetoric might work in putting your fundamentalist comrades in their place, but it does not work with me.

          • Frank

            And you still continue to prove you do not believe God.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            No, you think I don’t believe in God because I am not a fundamentalist and I dared to question your assumptions. Rather than you ever admitting misinterpretation or misrepresentation, it always ends up with this same kind of self-righteous dictation.

          • Frank

            You believe in a god but not The God. I don’t follow fundamentalism nor any denomination and so therefore by example of this also don’t pidgin hole people and their beliefs because they are not fundamentalist or following a specific denomination. I question even people I know who follow Jesus their beliefs at time and so by example do not pidgin hole people because they question what I speak. But God willing I do speak the Spirit of God as discerned and thought by Him through His Scriptures, judging all things as He has enlightened me.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Frank: “You believe in a god but not The God.”

            Again, it is part of your apologetical program to denigrate my faith with this god/God false dichotomy. The only reason you are doing so is because I questioned your assumptions and you associate me with Catholicism.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Frank: “I don’t follow fundamentalism nor any denomination “

            Fundamentalism is not a denomination. Besides, all of the rhetoric, methodology, and ignorance of history that you employ is exactly the same as that of fundamentalist and Evangelical polemicists. If you think that you know your Catholicism, then I know my fundamentalism and Evangelicalism.

          • Magister_militum_praesentalis

            Frank: “But God willing I do speak the Spirit of God as discerned and thought by Him through His Scriptures, judging all things as He has enlightened me.”

            That is what everyone says in order to self-justify their accusations and personal prejudices.

            It is not an excuse for ignorance and the inability to provide any reason for hatred of Catholicism and Christians who are not fundamentalists or Evangelicals.

            It is also not an excuse that can explain away the inherent problems in the contradictions that different fundamentalists and Evangelicals in the same communities, gatherings, and churches have with each other, all claiming to at the same time to be enlightened by the Spirit.

          • Concerned

            And neither are you Barking Dawg.

          • Badkey

            Talk to Gary. He’s sweating in lust for dead gay folks.

        • dark477

          it’s all the same crap

          • lynn

            Wrong. Sharia law wants to make you comply with all that they demand while Christians will only tell you about the Lord if you will listen. Sharia law is closer related to those who you are supporting in that they wan’t to endoctrinae all of our children to make Christians participate in their life style. I don’t no of any Christians that would try to force anybody to go to Church against their will. But ssm folks force (by law) Christians to participate in their weddings. I don’t think I need to give an example now do I?

          • dark477

            the law requires you to treat everyone equally while running a business how you feel about them is irrelevant. and sharia is no different to halakha, it only has relevance to those that believe in it

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “But ssm folks force (by law) Christians to participate in their weddings. ”

            Anti-discrimination laws were put into place either by a vote of the people, or a vote of the people’s elected representatives.

            No one is “forced” to participate in a same-gender marriage. Opening a business is a choice. What services the business offers is a choice. There is no “forcing”.

          • http://www.FascistDykeMotors.com/ Katy

            That’s not true, though, is it?

            The very fact that we’re having this conversation proves that. We have a state Supreme Court Chief Justice who says that the civil law must fall because of his faith.

            Now, if he was saying that he lives his faith in his own life and therefore will not be marrying a man, I would agree with you. But here, he says that everyone (Christian or otherwise) is going to live by the tenets of his faith… that’s enforcing his interpretation of his faith on everyone by power of the state.

        • g0vt_h00ker

          It’s a nearly identical set of rules, seeing as you share the same god.

        • Badkey

          Same thing.

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        We are talking about the true God, not the one who came 600 years after Jesus and took the name of an Egyptian moon god, ruthlessly conquering continents, as his armies went forth in bloody battles for centuries until the Crusades finally put an end to it and ushered in the Renaissance.

        • dark477

          oh that moon god BS. I’ve studied egyptian mythology and there was no god moon or otherwise called allah. and the crusades didn’t achive the renaissance

          http://europeanhistory.about.com/od/therenaissance/a/causesrenaissance.htm

        • Badkey

          ALLUAH AKBAR!

          You’re no different.

          • Rexford Belleville

            But there is a difference, Religion demands obedience but only Christ can make it possible. the world hates Christ for telling them what they can’t do and the world’s only option apart from Christ is to declare that what was sinful is no longer sinful.

        • Concerned

          Thank you someone who knows the truth and the History involved.

    • piejon

      Not in America it doesn’t.

    • David Worley

      Hey Einstein Badkey.. I have a real question.. What is the difference in an anti-christ person being forced by man’s law to be Baptised in the creek by a Preacher and a Preacher being forced to perform a Queer Wedding? Does one freedom trump the other?

  • Ray Watson

    GOD FIRST, LAST, AND ONLY.

    • Nailz73235

      Ayman al Zawahiri could not have said it better.

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        No, he would have said Allah. God is Jehovah. Allah is an Egyptian moon god. Big difference.

        • dark477

          allah is the Arabic word for god nothing else

        • Nailz73235

          On Ayman al-Zawahiri’s thinking, Allah is the supreme deity, who controls all things and to whose judgment every man must submit in the hereafter.

          On your thinking, the Christian god is the supreme deity, who controls all things and to whose judgment every man must submit in the hereafter.

          You, who fail to follow Islam, do not recognize Allah’s absolute supremacy. Al-Zawahiri, who fails to follow Christianity, does not recognize the Christian god’s absolute supremacy.

          You’re in the same boat in both cases. The comparison stands.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            The comparison falls, because no Christian is forcing their Christianity on anyone at knife point. Christians realize that only God can change a heart; it cannot be changed by the sword or by coercion. You really ought to try Jesus sometime. You might have a complete change of heart like I did many years ago and see things from a whole different perspective. It has been a great life. I could not recommend it higher. 🙂

          • Nailz73235

            Yvonne:

            We’re losing track of the original point here. The original post, to which I had been replying, said, “GOD FIRST, LAST, AND ONLY.” That is the basis for comparing the commenter, Ray Watson, and Ayman al-Zawahiri. For both men, god reigns supreme and, before god, all else falls aside as irrelevant. The basis for comparison was not forcible conversion but, rather, singular focus on god. (Admittedly, different gods for different men, but that’s a quibble.)

            Thank you for your recommendation to “try Jesus,” as you say, but the fact remains that Christianity is incompatible with two things: the facts of the universe and the content of my character. I cannot bend my knee to a deity who doesn’t exist and who, in the book whose content people ascribe to his perfect revelation, espouses a moral code that I largely find equal parts disagreeable and ridiculous.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            Your choce. Just remember, when you stand in judgment and every knee bows before God, you had a chance to believe and receive all the amazing things Jesus has in store for those who love Him and chose rather the skeptics path, to mock and deny. While there is life there is hope. I will pray for you.

          • Nailz73235

            Although I appreciate what seems to be your sincere concern for me, I cannot let pass what you did in your comment, which is “to beg the question.” That, in short, means to assume the conclusion that you wish to argue in favor of.

            What you basically did was say, “It is your choice not to believe in god, but since god exists, your choice is a poor one, and I pity you for it.”

            This is indistinguishable from me saying, “It is your choice to believe in god, but since god does not exist, your choice is a poor one, and I pity you for it.”

            It is simply to sidestep cogent argument and declare victory from the outset.

            Your preachment in favor of Christianity carries as much weight with me as a devout Muslim’s preachment in favor of Islam carries with you: precisely none. Because I know Christianity is false with certitude that is equal to your certitude that Islam is false.

    • Badkey

      ALLUAH AKBAR!!!

      • Liz Litts

        Shut up and drink some more Koolaid!

      • David Allen

        Savages

        • Badkey

          They are, aren’t they?

  • Davy Buck

    “no one could be reached for comment.” A Baptist with nothing to say? Right.

    • lynn

      Not a real Baptist. A real Christian might be forced to obey a bad law, but he, or she would not condone it, nor would they even comprimise with it. If they spoke about it, it would naturally be in a negative voice.

  • Concerned

    Why is Christianity so openly targeted and not Islam or Buddhism or Satanism, what about atheism? People are so quick to make snide remarks about Christians when most wont even be able to handle it, its not for the weak and definitely not for the self absorbed.

    • piejon

      Get the Lions!

    • dark477

      you’re the majority and you’re the one’s fighting against this.

      • Jack Savage

        Because I have never heard a Buddhist come out and so openly throw fallacy around. And if you look very hard you will see that Islam is also getting slammed. Satanism, and Buddhism do not get up in your face about it. Where both of the Abrahamic religions do. When you try to be the loudest voice in the room, whether or not you were trying to be reasonable, then you should expect someone may have a dissenting opinion. you do not hear Buddhist calling for a governor’s resignation for upholding his oath of office. & I guarantee you you probably won’t hear a cabalist say it either. More and more people are learning to do more and more research. And learn a lot about what this country truly is about. And because of that, debate, not rhetoric will continue to be the norm.

    • Delvol

      Because we are commanded to love our enemies and pray for them as part of the new covenant. Our detractors and even our sworn enemies know this and will commit violent or discriminatory acts knowing that more than likely, we will “turn the other cheek” so to speak.

      They see the the new covenant as a sign of weakness, I see it as a sign of strength.

    • Jeff Robison

      “Why is Christianity so openly targeted and not Islam or Buddhism or Satanism, what about atheism?”

      Perhaps because only certain groups of Christians are attempting to turn rules of their religion into legislation. I’ve not heard of any cases of Buddhist groups trying to install facets of their belief system into the American legal code.

      I’m not a Christian. I’ll be quite happy if people like yourself would keep your religion out of my life, where it is not wanted.

      • Concerned

        I never invited you into this conversation let alone offered my religion to you. Christians all over the world have kept quiet because of who we are and what is expected from us, but seeing as how times have changed and how keeping quiet has brought a war to our doors, I and many others will defend OUR GOD and OUR FAITH, which by the way is not a religion. If you are so bothered by the conversations held here you are welcome to log out, if you want to hear about Jesus I am happy to share HIM with you. One more thing Jeff, other religions are fighting to take over your country and your entire existence as you know it with violence and murder. People like me are here to lend a hand and not ask for anything in return. If instilling good values in the American Legal code is going to make America a better place for all without violent attacks then I am doing the right thing.

  • smc

    Will he be endorsing child sacrifice (abortion) as well, since this is legal in our country, too? You cannot support sodomy (in any way) without being one yourself (even if only in mind). Romans 1

    • lynn

      I believe that to be true.

    • piejon

      I can support sodomy. Lots of straight people do too.

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        Then you fall into Romans 1 – “Having pleasure in those that do those things.”

      • smc

        I have never met one straight person who supported homosexuality. Stop lying. Every “straight” person I knew who supported this lifestyle was a BISEXUAL, which makes them a HOMOSEXUAL. This a judgment from the Lord, not something to be proud about.

        Romans 1:26-27
        26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

        27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

        REPENT.

        I am an ex-homosexual saved by the blood of the lamb.

        GLORY TO GOD!!!

        • Robert H.

          Ok……”Unapologetic born again Christian. And unlike the majority of professing Christians today, I actually believe what the Bible says. EX- occultist, satanist, homosexual, witch, diviner, sorceress, drug and alcohol addict. Saved by the Lord Jesus Christ in 2009. GLORY TO GOD.” So you are a bloviating windbag you like to go with what’s controversial… nice

    • dark477

      probably since there are clinics in Alabama.

    • Robert H.

      No no….that was god who burned cities to the ground including babies.

      • smc

        God destroyed the world due to the wickedness and satanic practices of that day. He’s going to do it again very soon. READ REVELATION, and repent while you still have time.

        The wicked will not stand in the day of judgment. Everyone deserves to burn in the lake of fire….there are no innocent people in hell. Humans are WICKED.

        Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, seduced millions of women into sacrificing their own children and calling it a “medical procedure.” She wanted to annihilate all blacks, Jews, and those with physical or mental disabilities. Over one billion babies killed to date around the world.

        THERE ARE NO GOOD PEOPLE.

        • Robert H.

          If you are referencing Noah’s flood….well… There is simply not one ioda if internationally coinciding evidence that it ever happened.

          And before Margaret Sanger, women were pumping lysol into their reproductive systems to terminate pregnancies. So yes, she worked to provide a better option. They were already happening, read a book.

          • smc

            There is evidence of a worldwide flood. You reject God because you foolishly believe that you will not give account for your wickedness. Your defending child killers (in any era) proves your own wicked, sinful heart. You are hellbound, and God calls you a fool.

            Psalm 5:5 The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: thou hatest all workers of iniquity.

          • Robert H.

            no…. there is no such evidence or fundies would shout it from the hill tops. I am not defending anything, I was simply stating you were wrong. Look at southern states for example. They have the highest rate or teen pregnancy, YET they have the highest concentration of fundamentalist Christians. The more secular the area (which also means more educations by default) the lower rates of abortion. Er go, your insistence on religious beliefs being a part of the law making process is killing babies.

          • smc

            Yes, there is evidence and secular society has been trying to hide the info for decades. I am not wrong. I back up what the Bible says one-hundred percent that man is inherently evil and needs a Savior. The highest rates of abortion are in the black communities. Child sacrifice happens for a number of reasons, primarily sin…pick one. I am not religious. I am born again and have a relationship with the Lord Jesus Christ. Religion doesn’t save anyone.

          • Robert H.

            You’re still simply using words with no evidence. No world wide flood happened. You asserted it, now prove it. But I would not waste my time, it doesn’t exist. And it is not simply within “black communities” It is specifically within impoverished communities. Which is something the south has in great abundance.

  • Mr. Avatar

    He should quit calling himself a Christian and those that go to his church should shun him! You sir have brought disgrace on the house of God!

    • Badkey

      Ooooo… Anger. Just what we expect.

      • Patty Walter Briseno

        Righteous anger. Nothing wrong with that. You are right Mr. Avatar. High time true bible believing Christians speak the truth.

        • Badkey

          Just like Muslims.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            Muslims have some truth, but they choose to disseminate their truth with coercion, murder, lies, and other unrighteous methods. They would do better if they would practice Christ’s ways. So would Christians, incidentally. But lots of people call themselves Christians who are not. “By their fruit you will know them.”

    • piejon

      Judge not.

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        Judge not, discern not, speak not, defend not, in short, become a vegetable. What a twisting of Scriptures. Why do you think God ordained judges? Why did He give us minds? Every decision we make is a judgment of some kind. The key is to judge with righteous judgment. To do that, we need to know the righteous Judge and His Word and make our judgments in accordance with them.

      • Patty Walter Briseno

        “JUDGE NOT by appearances, but instead JUDGE correctly” John 7:24. Nice try though.

    • dark477

      his duty is the the law not your god

      • Patty Walter Briseno

        If he calls himself a man of God, his duty is to follow Gods law. He needs to be truthful, that’s all.

        • Jack Savage

          I am starting to think that maybe some of you that are on here have no earthly idea what you are truly talking about. You do realize that this governor took an oath before God to uphold at a minimum the Alabama State Constitution, & I will guarantee you somewhere in there it says something about upholding the laws of the United States. When he took that oath to become the chief executive of the state of Alabama, then unfortunately he removed himself from using the Bible as a reference as to what he would and would uphold. As a Christian I have taken that oath of office 6 times… Which said I would “defend the laws of the United States and the Constitution against all enemies both foreign and domestic.” Guess what you don’t hear in there and that holds for any oath of office. You do not hear a reference to the Bible. Christians have to stop fooling themselves that our secular government was based on any kind of biblical inclination. Rather it was based on a secular notion of common law, such that every religion would have freedom to practice here, even those that did not have a religion. We were founded as a constitutional republic specifically for the express purpose of being able to protect everyone and their rights, not just the majority.

          People really need to think about that fact, because anyone that is in an executive type job, that would be a person enpowered to enforce the law, must go by the law of the land. And that law of the land is not a Bible. It is our body of law.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            When the laws of this land were first made, they were indeed based on Judeo Christian laws. Thou shalt not steal. Thou shalt not bear false witness. Thou shalt not kill. Even a six-day work week. Sayting it came from European common law doesn’t invalidate that fact. Europeans were the first to be influenced by Rome and the Bible. Granted, we have strayed far and are reaping the results. Killing now is fine by some. Americans have killed untold millions of babies with abortions since the 1960s when God’s law was replaced with man’s. Ditto for plenty of other laws. If you had lived through these times, as I did, and watched as first the Bible, then prayer, then common sense were removed from the public square, you would realize the pain many of us feel at seeing the country change and lose hope on so many levels.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “When the laws of this land were first made, they were indeed based on Judeo Christian laws.”

            Given that the protections provided by the constitution directly violate 8 of the 10 commandments, your statement is false.

            Saying that because some of our laws are consistent with biblical teachings thus means that our laws were based upon biblical teaching is simply without merit.

          • Jack Savage

            How about this. I dont care. I do not want anyone’s religious views influencing the secular government of the US. Pick up a book, read the Federalist Papers and a few other notable works by the Founding Fathers.

            Because if Christianity can become the government sponsored religion, any other religion can become the same, just needs a majority in the Legislature right?

            That said. He took an oath. To office. To the Constitution. He is the executor of the laws, and that is his job. Glad he at least has the testicular fortitude to uphold his oath. As a Christian, I worry the day we interject so much religion into the government that we open the doors for such issues as Mosaic law, or Sharia law.

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            Yup, that is where our wonderful multiculturalism has got us.

          • Jack Savage

            So you would want everyone but white, Christian conservatives to be in this country. Do you want a

            What about the Chinese? Japanese? Most of those aren’t Christian. What about Indians? Native Americans?, most of them are not Christians. Maybe while we are at it, toss out the Hassidic Jews, pagans, and other cultures that do not fit your narrative.

            Maybe we should figure a cut off date and throw anyone out that came here before that. Lets say 100 years, and anyone that cannot prove at least two generations before that, that they should go to the country of their ethnic origin. You know there are some Muslim strongholds in the Appalachians where people can go many generations back. Are they the “cultural norm” you seek?

            Or how about this. This is a land founded on many cultures, many religions, and being called the melting pot of the world. The soldiers, sailors and airmen of this country reflect that. From Sikhs to Sioux, Italians to Irish, Buddhist to Baptist, this country has been multicultural LONG before you came in it, and it will be long after you are put in the ground. SO please, stop proscribing to McCarthyism tactics and rhetoric. And get a clue

          • Yvonne Celeste Lee

            You are assuming that all Christians are white, which is completely erroneous. When the country began making all religions equal, even satanism, however, is when we began to lose our way. Throwing away God’s moral laws has been the downfall of America. I know you will not agree with that, but I hold to that opinion strongly. To each his own.

          • Jack Savage

            Oh and just so you have a clue on me. I AM a Christian, but I also understand the importance of a secular government. We do not need to become Rwanda/Uganda/Saudi Arabia.

      • Gary

        Then he needs to stop pretending he is a Christian.

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          So Christians are above the law?

    • Haqodeshim

      Todd Starnes: ·

      President Obama lied to the nation in 2008 when he said he opposed gay marriage for religious reasons, according to a new book by former political advisor David Axelrod.

      Time Magazine reports Obama even lied inside Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church.

      “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said at the time. “Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

      He lied inside a church. He lied outside the church. He lied to the nation.

      • Haqodeshim

        Obama’s lies are like the Energizer Bunny unfortunately, they just go on, and on, and on, and on . Of course,we know who the Father of lies is, so much for Obama’s fake Christianity.

  • http://danbel.webspawner.com Dan Beliveau

    This is really very simple. A Christian who puts secularism above God’s word is contemptible. Many people have refused to obey bad orders. God says it’s an abomination, the State refused to acknowledge homosexuals getting married. And a single heathen has overturned the law. Bentley should be remembered by all Christians in Alabama. But there are very few people with the righteousness of Judge Moore.

    • dark477

      god has no authority in this country and Moore won’t be a judge for much longer

      • http://danbel.webspawner.com Dan Beliveau

        Your correct in yours and other liberals eyes. But when it’s all said and done God will always be the last authority.

      • Edward Parker

        GOD has all authority and before long you will be shown that!

        • Jeff Robison

          Until God pays taxes, registers for the draft, and so forth, His opinion on American law means precisely zilch.

  • http://GREATSITE.COM/ John Lawton Jeffcoat III

    Yes, Gov. Bentley is compromising his supposedly Christian ethics to obey this ungodly Law of Man, so he can keep his job. However, before we single him out as the only “Christian” Governor currently making huge moral compromises to stay in power… let’s remember that ALL 50 State Governors currently obey Federal Law regarding abortion rights within their respective Sates. NOT ONE of our 50 State Governors has stood up and said:
    “Regardless of Federal Law, there will be no murder of unborn babies in my State”.
    So really… is Gov. Bentley of Alabama any more guilty than any of the other dozens of so-called “Christian Governors”?

    • Yvonne Celeste Lee

      Probably, in the sense that he is advocating for them and taking a stand against God’s law while claiming to be a Christian of what was once a biblical denomination. Jesus called this hypocrisy and singled out the pharisees as white-washed sepulchers for just such things.

  • lynn

    He needs to come on out of his closet.

  • lynn

    Those that approve of gay marriages look to be at the very least gay-wanta-bes.

    • Opus35

      Do you practice ridiculous things to say, or does it just come naturally?

      • lynn

        Are you gay?

        • Opus35

          Are you?

          • lynn

            Does a chicken have lips?

          • Opus35

            I would not know……..i’m a vegetarian. 😎

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      What is your basis for that statement? I know many, many heterosexuals who have absolutely no romantic sexual attraction to people of the same gender, but who none-the-less support allowing two citizens of the same gender to enter into civil marriage.

  • Frank

    Bentley denies Jesus before men. Jesus has already declared judgement on Bently. Bently needs to be excommunicated until he repents.

    • Haqodeshim

      Todd Starnes: ·

      President Obama lied to the nation in 2008 when he said he opposed gay marriage for religious reasons, according to a new book by former political advisor David Axelrod.

      Time Magazine reports Obama even lied inside Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church.

      “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said at the time. “Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

      He lied inside a church. He lied outside the church. He lied to the nation.

      • Haqodeshim

        Obama’s lies are like the Energizer Bunny unfortunately, they just go on, and on, and on, and on . Of course,we know who the Father of lies is, so much for Obama’s fake Christianity

        • Frank

          Yes.

  • what_would_ghengis_do

    If you are the governor you must obey and enforce the law. If you don’t want to face these dilemmas stay out of politics.

  • Gary

    Following the court’s decision is immoral. If Bentley was a real Christian, he would resign rather than follow the order.

    If he runs for anything else in Alabama, I hope the voters understand his corrupt nature and withhold their votes from him.

    • Badkey

      *sniffle*

  • Josey

    Mark 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in
    this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man
    be
    ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.

    Joshua 24:15 And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord,
    choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your
    fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of
    the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we
    will serve the Lord.
    God’s laws always should be followed first above man’s laws, He never leads us wrong and even in the midst of persecution, we should obey God not man.

    • Robert H.

      When we become a theocracy you can quote “scripture” in defense of your position on a forum about a constitutional requirement for a Gov to obey federal precedent.

  • Harry Oh!

    The only reason liberals and rinos push this Law bull, is because it supports their plans to destroy Christianity and promote a secular, morally relative society. If a judge unilaterally made a law to banish homosexuality, they would be calling for his execution.

    • piejon

      Was Slavery God’s Law?

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      “If a judge unilaterally made a law to banish homosexuality”

      How would you banish homosexuality?

      • Harry Oh!

        Make it illegal. What did you think I meant? Have them all deported?

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          Making it illegal would not “banish” homosexuality. People would still be homosexual. How would you reconcile the protections provided by the constitution with a law making it illegal to be homosexual?

          • Harry Oh!

            It was a hypothetical, ease up on the hemp.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            Since it doesn’t work hypothetically either, it appears that it is you who may want to ease up on the hemp. It appears to be causing you to come up with ideas that are completely ludicrous.

  • Jeff Tilley

    Folks it’s time to peel away from the wicked and evil leadership of Washington DC. Period. The South deserves better.

    • BarkingDawg

      You lost in 1865. Get over it.

  • Bradley Lovell

    Sharia law came before Christ was here and when Christ came we were to follow his rules and that is why he died on the Cross.

    • dark477

      Um islam came after christianity

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        Over 600 years after, in fact.

        • dark477

          and yet you insist that allah is Egyptian

  • Rick

    If it was not for the temptation of the devil having ADAM and EVE eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, we would not be in the predicament we are in today. But no satan deceived them and that is exactly what has happened to this world. Everyone has been deceived.

  • James Staten

    I remember over fifty years ago I asked my father when we were discussing the Lord or the Law? He said we follow the Law till it crosses obedience to the Lord. Abortion, Homosexuality and soon the total stabbing Israel in the back. America’s only hope a Nineveh moment!!!!

    • thoughtsfromflorida

      Well the good news, James, is that you aren’t required to marry a man. So you can follow your beliefs in that regard.

      • James Staten

        You are absolutely right. In this world or the world to come.

      • Robert H.

        I doubt James has much need for an abortion either…

      • Yvonne Celeste Lee

        Not required to marry one, just required to support them, participate in their “weddings”in other ways, or lose your job, your home, and have your life threatened by their vindictive buddies. And if the homosexuals have their way, pastors will be required to “marry” them, as well. Stop it already!!!

        • thoughtsfromflorida

          ” just required to support them, participate in their “weddings”in other ways, or lose your job, your home, and have your life threatened by their vindictive buddies.”

          No one is required to “support them, participate in their ‘weddings’ in other ways”. That is nothing more than hyperbole. Please, spare us the righteous indignation and falsehoods.

  • dongszkie

    He is just a plain compromiser,cannot stand on what he believes to be the truth…unlike Jesus and his apostles.

    • Gary

      I don’t think he really believes the Bible to be the truth. People’s actions always show what they really believe.

      • dongszkie

        YOU REALLY IS RIGHT GARY…or he just limping on two roadpath in his life because he a politician at the same time.

        • Haqodeshim

          Todd Starnes: ·

          President Obama lied to the nation in 2008 when he said he opposed gay marriage for religious reasons, according to a new book by former political advisor David Axelrod.

          Time Magazine reports Obama even lied inside Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church.

          “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said at the time. “Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

          He lied inside a church. He lied outside the church. He lied to the nation.

          • Haqodeshim

            Obama’s lies are like the Energizer Bunny unfortunately, they just go on, and on, and on, and on . Of course,we know who the Father of lies is, so much for Obama’s fake Christianity.

          • Haqodeshim

            %he apostle Paul, who called upon Christians to submit to earthly authorities early in his ministry, was beheaded for not doing so later in his ministry:

            10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
            for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

            11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. – Matthew 5

            Emperor Worship – The Roman government did not begin this worship; at first, in fact, it did all it could to discourage it. Claudius (41-54 AD), the Emperor, said that he deprecated divine honors being paid to any human being. But as the years went on the Roman government saw in this Emperor-worship the one thing which could unify the vast Empire of Rome; here was the one centre on which they all could come together. So, in the end, the worship of the Emperor became, not voluntary, but compulsory. Once a year a man had to go and burn a pinch of incense to the godhead of Caesar and say, “Caesar is Lord.” And that is precisely what the Christians refused to do. For them Jesus Christ was the Lord, and to no man would they give that title which belonged to Christ.

            The Apostle Paul began his appeal under Claudius, but when Claudius was killed in 54 AD, Nero took his place, and had Paul beheaded.

            To have to suffer persecution is, as Jesus himself said, the way to walk the same road as the prophets, and the saints, and the martyrs have walked. To suffer for the right is to gain a share in great succession. The man who has to suffer something for his faith can throw back his head and say,

            “Brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod.”

            To suffer persecution is to make things easier for those who are to follow. Today we enjoy the blessing of liberty because men in the past were willing to buy it for us at the cost of blood, and sweat, and tears. They made it easier for us, and by a steadfast and immovable witness for Christ we make it easier for others who are still to come.

            The man who fights his battle for Christ will always make things easier for those who follow after. For them there will be one-less struggle to be encountered on the way.

            Still further, no man ever suffers persecution alone; if a man is called upon to bear material loss, the failure of friends, slander, loneliness, even the death of love, for his principles, he will not be left alone. Christ will be nearer to him than at any other time. (Barclay 114-117)

            Read more at – https://www.facebook.com/notes/george-walter-bratcher-iii/blessed-what-does-it-really-mean-why-did-jesus-say-it/10151339668041373

            YOU CAN ONLY submit to the laws of man in so far as they do not violate your faith in Jesus, for Paul was beheaded rather than to have violated his faith in Jesus as Lord.

            Big Progressive Nanny State Government is NOT LORD! Progressives believe you can only understand the Declaration of Independence without references to God, so for them, your rights are not endowed by your Creator, but come from the State, and when Big Prgoressive Nanny State Government can be your new god telling you how to walk, talk, and chew gum, what in Hades do you need a 1st amendment for in the first place?

  • Peter Leh

    “Christian News Network attempted to reach First Baptist Church Tuscaloosa, but no one could be reached for comment”

    why would you attempt to contact the church and not the governor?

    • Gary

      To see if they plan to remove him from membership.

      • Peter Leh

        ah….

  • Peter Leh

    so before the gay law, we think this governor agreed with ALL the laws of the state but NOW he must go?

  • Edward Parker

    he can not call himself a pastor anymore because he is not leading the flock in the right direction

    • Opus35

      Can he leave them in a direction, that he and his flock feel is good orderly direction?

    • Peter Leh

      he is a gov not a pastor

  • David Worley

    Another good reason the rest of the states think of Alabama people as being Dumbasses..
    Coward. Hypocrite and Blasphemy.. Give up your religion if you are not Man enough to support your Constitutional privilege and God given Right to practice your religious beliefs without persecution from the Government.

    • Peace42day

      Pee-wee Herman?!? I just don’t get everyone’s avatar.

  • Rexford Belleville

    When the law requires that we worship something other than God then it is time to take a stand. This law does not require our worship so we must respect it. Any law the forces us to directly participate or celebrate an immoral act as a part of our method of supporting our families is an act of worship of man above God. In this case the law becomes a religion that worships man and not God, john 9:4

  • Kathi Jones Harris

    Altho I personally disapprove of same-sex marriage…I would prefer they go for domestic unions…. AT this point….Hey…why not let them learn to deal with the same misery the rest of us do?
    We have a 50%+ divorce rate in this country, among heterosexuals. Marriage, it seems, is not so sacred in our society these days either.
    How does gay marriage somehow denigrate normal heterosexual marriages? That doesn’t make any sense to me.

    • Peter Leh

      true.

      the domestic union/ civil union ship sailed ten years ago. the christians would not go for it back then, either.

  • Frank

    Apostate Bentley is following apostate Russel Moore. Blind leading the blind so they both fall into the Pit.

  • Pauline Smith

    How weak we have become in standing up for The Truth, His Truth. The Disciples were stoned and beaten, jailed, shipwrecked for Christ. Hebrews speaks of the faith of Abel, Enoch , Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses. And from Hebrews 11:23-28, 23 “By faith Moses’ parents hid him for three months after he was born, because they saw he was no ordinary child, and they were not afraid of the king’s edict.

    24 By faith Moses, when he had grown up, refused to be known as the son of Pharaoh’s daughter. 25 He chose to be mistreated along with the people of God rather than to enjoy the fleeting pleasures of sin. 26 He regarded disgrace for the sake of Christ as of greater value than the treasures of Egypt, because he was looking ahead to his reward. 27 By faith he left Egypt, not fearing the king’s anger; he persevered because he saw him who is invisible. 28 By faith he kept the Passover and the application of blood, so that the destroyer of the firstborn would not touch the firstborn of Israel.” And Hebrews 12:1-3,12 “Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles. And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, 2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. 3 Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart. ” Maybe this Sunday School teacher needs to go back to Sunday School and pray for the Holy Spirit to guide him and completely surrender his life to Christ, and follow the example set by the perfecter of our faith.

  • Reason2012

    This assumes there’s such a thing as “same – gender marriage to begin with”, which there is not.

    The issue is does the state have the right to re-define religious institutions and pass laws to establish this new religious institution, which would in effect be passing laws to establish a new state religion (violation of the establishment clause of the First Amendment), which in turn would criminalize Christian belief about marriage (another violation of the First Amendment).

    And on both counts, states do not have any right to do any such thing – we’re protected from such judicial religious tyranny by the Constitution of the United States of America.

    Not to mention that every single man already has the same right as every other man: to marry one woman. And every single woman already has the same right as every single woman: to marry one man. So the claim anyone’s being denied “equal rights” is a lie.

    Jesus pointed out that marriage is between one man and one woman:

    Matthew 19:4-6 “And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

    Jesus even points out that for the cause of making them male and female, this is why male will leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife.

    Mark 10:5-7 “And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. (6) But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. (7) For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;”

    Jesus said God made them male and female – not male and male – not female and female.

    Jesus said man shall leave father and mother, not father and father, not mother and mother.

    Jesus said man shall cleave to his wife, not to his husband, not to her wife.

    Not to mention Jesus is God, so the entire Word of God is the Words of Christ. As Jesus is The Word.

    John 1:1-3 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. (2) The same was in the beginning with God. (3) All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

    John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”

    The Lord rebukes us for our attempts to destroy what He defined as one man and one woman.

    As if that’s not enough,

    (1) Marriage is a religious institution that has existed since the beginning of time.

    (2) The government is violating the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America by REDEFINING religious institutions then passing laws to establish this new state religion where anyone who does not adhere to this new state religion is condemned as a criminal: sued and fined thousands of dollars.

    (3) Marriage is for the possibility of procreation for the continuance of society. A same-gender marriage is, by design, never capable of such a thing.

    (4) Any pro-creation should be within a marriage – same-gender ‘marriages’ are forced to go outside the ‘marriage” 100% of the time by design.

    (5) Kids have the right to be raised by their biological mother and father – same-gender marriages deny them this right 100% of the time, by design.

    (6) Kids have the right to be raised by a mother and a father, not forced into setups that are dysfunctional 100% of the time: two or more fathers and no mother, or two or more mothers and no father.

    (7) Every single person alive has one biological mother and one biological father. Nature alone re-iterates what marriage is – that this is what a family is.

    (8) A black man who has no problem baking cakes for white people cannot be forced to bake cakes for the ACT of a “whites are supreme” meeting and so on. LIkewise a Christian who has no problem baking cakes for those who currently profess homosexuality cannot be forced to bake a cake for the ACT of a same-gender wedding.

    • Reason2012

      Even children who grew up forced to be in homosexual “households” condemn it and expose it for the depravity is truly inflicts on children.

      http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/lauretta-brown/adults-raised-gay-couples-speak-out-against-gay-marriage-federal-court

      Christian beliefs criminalized: fined many thousands of dollars and sued if you get out of line with this new State Religion

      A sampling of how criminalizing Christian beliefs on marriage because it now violates this new State Religion and how all of this is a violation of the Constitution of the United States on many levels:

      Mayor calls own city’s churches “criminals”.

      http://www.wnd.com/2015/01/mayor-calls-own-citys-churches-criminals/

      Bakery fined $150,000

      http://www.kgw.com/story/news/local/2015/02/02/ruling-gresham-bakery-discriminated-against-same-sex-couple/22760387/

      Christian fired by Ford for expressiong his disagreement over them promoting homosexuality in newsletters.

      http://christiannews.net/2015/02/08/ford-contractor-says-he-was-fired-for-speaking-against-companys-support-of-homosexuality/

      It was Ekstrom who said last month that Stutzman personally was liable for the claims against her, placing both her business assets and her home and personal savings at risk.

      The judge ordered that the state and the homosexual plaintiffs, each of whom filed lawsuits, could collect damages and attorneys’ fees from Stutzman.

      “The message of these rulings is unmistakable: The government will bring about your personal and professional ruin if you don’t help celebrate same-sex marriage,” said ADF Senior Counsel Kristen Waggoner.

      http://www.wnd.com/2015/02/judge-authorizes-personal-ruin-for-florist/

      http://christiannews.net/2015/02/19/christian-florist-found-guilty-of-discrimination-for-declining-gay-wedding-could-lose-home-life-savings/

      • Peace42day

        Gays and lesbians have been adopting children as far back as the 1980s, I think by now we would of Heard from hundreds of children raised by gay and lesbian parents. Oh here is one. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yMLZO-sObzQ
        This study says what we all know about parenting, love your children teach them and support them.
        http://newsroom.melbourne.edu/news/children-same-sex-attracted-parents-score-high-health-and-wellbeing

        As far as the baker’s, try to Google, Matt Stolhandske, he is a Christian gay activist, and the only person that I know of trying to raise money for the bakers in Oregon to pay their fine. That is unless you know of some other christians, who are straight doing something for them. I mostly hear them just complain about them getting the fine.

        • Reason2012

          Hello. Please cite 5 cases where two men or two women adopted children in 1980.

          Secondly you link a story of family members that were denied the right to be raised by both their biological parents, a “family” where they are forced, by design, to get a third person involved 100% of the time to have kids, then denying that kid the right to be raised by his own biological parents (a male and a female), and denying them the right to be raised by a mother and father at all.

          Not to mention there’s no such thing as same-gender marriage. Marriage by definition is one man and one woman. One man and two women is not a marriage and so on.

          • Peace42day

            The definition of marriage has already changed, oh have you not heard, 37 states and DC has marriage equality. You can stomp your feet, and cry about it, but that won’t change the facts. My partner and I have been together for 21 years, we got married back in 2013. The US government recognizes this, as does the state of New Mexico.

          • Gary

            God, and Christians, do not recognize your fake “marriage”.

          • Peace42day

            Oh that to bad……who cares. That’s not what we are going for. We are getting what we want, Christians gay and lesbian are the ones who have to worry about that. Otherwise we are good. Now Gary, what are you going to do with all that anger and suffering you have. It’s going to be your demise. Breathe deep and relax.

          • Paul Hiett

            You should ask Gary what he’d like to see happen to people like you.

          • Gary

            There is no such thing as a homosexual Christian.

          • Badkey

            Yes you are.

          • Peace42day

            Gary, you need to get rid of your hate and suffering. Peace. 😎

          • Paul Hiett

            Well, you don’t speak for all Christians, and if you think you speak for your “god”, well, you’ve got a rude awakening coming.

            Regardless, no one really cares what you, your “god”, or your fellow hateful Christians think about his marriage.

          • Gary

            Yes, I do speak for all Christians. All Christians believe God defined marriage as the union of a man and a woman only. And it is YOU who is in for the rude awakening.

          • Paul Hiett

            No Gary, clearly you don’t speak for all Christians, otherwise there would be no Christians who support gay marriage. Clearly, facts mean nothing to you.

            As well, “God” made a LOT of rules, especially in Leviticus. I don’t suppose you follow all of them do you? I’m willing to bet you don’t. You’re probably like most Christians in that regard…cherry picking which “laws” to follow.

          • Gary

            There are no Christians who support ssm. Your understanding of the Bible and Christianity are very flawed. Which is no surprise, given your beliefs.

          • Paul Hiett

            Yes, Gary, there are plenty. I know you’ll just claim that they’re not real Christians, but fortunately, you don’t speak for them.

          • Gary

            You cannot be a Christian while supporting ssm and homosexuals. Christians oppose those things.

          • Paul Hiett

            Yep…I pegged you spot on.

          • Reason2012

            So you cannot cite any such cases to back up your claim that two men were adopting children in 1980.
            Thank you for posting.

          • Peace42day

            And thank you for your arrogance.

          • Reason2012

            So you get done being condescending and arrogant by telling someone “you can stomp your feet and cry about it” and when they ignore your hateful arrogance and point out you didn’t cite any cases to back up what you said is fact you call them “arrogant”? No, thank YOU for your arrogance that I ignored the first time around to instead address you making claims you say were fact but then when called on not being able to back it up resort to more hate.

            Take care.

          • Peace42day

            You seem up set. You should take a minute or two to clear your mind , before ranting and raven.

          • Paul Hiett

            Wow…you act like biological parents are always the best choice to raise a kid. Naive much?

          • Reason2012

            Assuming they want to, they are the best choice 100% of the time. Why do you want to legally deny kids this right and legally deny them the right to be raised by a mother and a father? Kids are just tools used and abused by the activists to promote their agenda.

        • Reason2012

          “I write because I am one of many children with gay parents who believe we should protect marriage. I believe you were right when, during the Proposition 8 deliberations, you said “the voice of those children [of same-sex parents] is important.” I’d like to explain why I think redefining marriage would actually serve to strip these children of their most fundamental rights.”
          http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2015/02/14370/

          • Peace42day

            Prove you have parents who are gay or lesbian.

          • Reason2012

            No one has “parents” that are gay or lesbian. Everyone’s parents are opposite gender. And that article is not about me.

          • Peace42day

            Well I obviously don’t care about the article about. I don’t agree with it.

          • Peace42day

            Zack seem like a pretty happy person. Do the children, like Zack get to say they have a happy childhood and good parents? Or is that for individuals like yourself to decide?

          • Reason2012

            I could ask you the same question: Is that for you to decide to legally deny kids the right to be raised by their biological parents and also deny them the right to be raised by both a mother and a father?

            At least I want kids to have the LEGAL right to be raised by their own parents by not legally forcing laws that would prevent it.

          • Peace42day

            The children raised by gay and lesbians for the most part, were adopted. Who put those children in the adoption agencies? It was not gays and lesbians. Many of those children, are happy and healthy, and glad to be away from their abusive, drug addicted, alcoholic, biological parents. But by all means let them stay in foster homes until their biological parents can get a grip on themselves. Why go to a loving home, when you can stay in the system.

          • Reason2012

            So because they were put in adoption agencies, that gives you the right to legally prohibit them from being raised by a mother and father?

            So your logic is “let’s LEGALLY deny kids a father and mother and also LEGALLY deny kids the right to potentially be raised by their own biological parents b/c there are some kids in foster homes who have no been adopted yet”.

            Sorry many disagree with you.

          • Peace42day

            It is the biological parents who put them there. When you’re kids are taken away from you, you lose your legal rights. Why would you want child with someone who is a drug addict, alcoholic, or abusive to children. May word, you hate gays and lesbians so much you want them to be with bad parents?

          • Paul Hiett

            And yet, I live with a woman who was legally married to another woman for 12 years. Her now 18 year old son is ranked 12th in his high school, will be attending the college of his choice for free, and is a very happy individual regardless of the fact his “parents” were lesbians. Guess that article is full of you know what.

          • Reason2012

            So b/c one student ended up surviving the ordeal, all the other cases where the children point out how hobble it is are lies?
            No.

            For centuries courts sided with kids being raised by their own parents and then by both a mother and father because of the truth that kids fare better when raised by their biological parents and by both a mother and father. Homosexual activists seeks to move us backwards and now forced kids to not be allowed any such thing.

  • Edsel Chan

    Quite discouraging 🙁

    • BarkingDawg

      Why? He was elected State Governor, not State Preacher.

  • SOCIALISM-MUST-GO!

    Well Judas enjoy your pieces of silver while you can .

  • Turn Hearts

    If a foreign nation going by the name of the USA that is currently attacking us is allowed to continually inject their immoral values into the South by force without any resistance then we would all be just as well off if Germany had won WW II or if the Soviets had conquered us during the Cold War era. Trash is still trash.

    What is left of society when we allow those who commit once illegal acts of sodomy to masquerade as a legitimate marriage?

  • gregkliebigsr

    THIS IS THE COMMISSION THAT OUR CREATOR GOD (YAHWEH) HAS PUT ON ME TO DO, TO WARN HUMANITY !! LOVE WARNS !

    THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION !

    “Thou shalt NOT lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination!” says the LORD GOD.

    LEVITICUS18: 22. SO, LET ME MAKE IT PERFECTLY CLEAR , HOMOSEXUALITY IS AN ABOMINATION!!!

    The sin of homosexuality is a forgivable sin, but a person must confess and repent of their sin to the LORD JESUS; I John 1:8-9

    REPENT OF YOUR HOMOSEXUALITY! FOR THE BLOOD OF YESHUA (JESUS) WILL WASH YOU CLEAN AND DELIVER YOU OUT OF ALL YOUR SIN!

    ———

    HOMOSEXUALTY ROBS GOD OF NEW HUMANS TO LOVE AND FELLOWSHIP WITH AND DWELL IN! THAT, IS WHY YAHWEH (GOD) HATES HOMOSEXUALTY!

    IT IS A demon spirit from satan and he does not want more CHRISTIANS BORN FOR GOD TO INHABIT!

    ——-

    THIS IS THE COMMISSION THAT OUR CREATOR GOD (YAHWEH) HAS PUT ON ME TO DO, TO WARN HUMANITY !! LOVE WARNS !

    THIS IS NOT MY PERSONAL OPINION !

    “Thou shalt NOT lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination!” says the LORD GOD.

    LEVITICUS18: 22. SO, LET ME MAKE IT PERFECTLY CLEAR , HOMOSEXUALITY IS AN ABOMINATION!!!

    The sin of homosexuality is a forgivable sin, but a person must confess and repent of their sin to the LORD JESUS; I John 1:8-9

    REPENT OF YOUR HOMOSEXUALITY! FOR THE BLOOD OF YESHUA (JESUS) WILL WASH YOU CLEAN AND DELIVER YOU OUT OF ALL YOUR SIN!

    ———

    HOMOSEXUALTY ROBS GOD OF NEW HUMANS TO LOVE AND FELLOWSHIP WITH AND DWELL IN! THAT, IS WHY YAHWEH (GOD) HATES HOMOSEXUALTY!

    IT IS A demon spirit from satan and he does not want more CHRISTIANS BORN FOR GOD TO INHABIT!

    ——-

    Deuteronomy 23:17. There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a Sodomite of the sons of Israel.

    18. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a DOG , into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

    NOW, the term dog here means male prostitute: AND , YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE WHY GOD WOULD CALL THEM DOGS!!!

    NOW, LET US SEE WHAT THE LORD JESUS SAID ON THE SUBJECT:

    Revelation 22: 15. For without are DOGS, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

    NOW, SO AS NOT TO LEAVE OUT :

    ROMANS CHAPTER 1: 16 – 32

    WELL JUST READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!

    ROMANS CHAPTER 1: 16 – 32

    WELL JUST READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!

    I am a servant of the MOST HIGH GOD and YAHWEH IS HIS NAME , THESE ARE HIS WORDS, PLEASE , DO NOT ARGUE WITH ME, TALK TO HIM ABOUT THIS !!

    Deuteronomy 23:17. There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a Sodomite of the sons of Israel.

    18. Thou shalt not bring the hire of a whore, or the price of a DOG , into the house of the Lord thy God for any vow: for even both these are abomination unto the Lord thy God.

    NOW, the term dog here means male prostitute: AND , YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE WHY GOD WOULD CALL THEM DOGS!!!

    NOW, LET US SEE WHAT THE LORD JESUS SAID ON THE SUBJECT:

    Revelation 22: 15. For without are DOGS, and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie.

    NOW, SO AS NOT TO LEAVE OUT :

    ROMANS CHAPTER 1: 16 – 32

    WELL JUST READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!

    ROMANS CHAPTER 1: 16 – 32

    WELL JUST READ IT FOR YOURSELF!!!

    I am a servant of the MOST HIGH GOD and YAHWEH IS HIS NAME , THESE ARE HIS WORDS, PLEASE , DO NOT ARGUE WITH ME, TALK TO HIM ABOUT THIS !!

    • Opus35

      “Thou shalt NOT lie with mankind, as with womankind” I don’t see anything that speaks to two women, or to the idea of lesbians. So Gods coolwith that?

      • Paul Hiett

        I think you need more caps…it apparently makes the message that much more important.

  • Haqodeshim

    The apostle Paul, who called upon Christians to submit to earthly authorities early in his ministry, was beheaded for not doing so later in his ministry:

    10 Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
    for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

    11 “Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me.12 Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you. – Matthew 5

    Emperor Worship – The Roman government did not begin this worship; at first, in fact, it did all it could to discourage it. Claudius (41-54 AD), the Emperor, said that he deprecated divine honors being paid to any human being. But as the years went on the Roman government saw in this Emperor-worship the one thing which could unify the vast Empire of Rome; here was the one centre on which they all could come together. So, in the end, the worship of the Emperor became, not voluntary, but compulsory. Once a year a man had to go and burn a pinch of incense to the godhead of Caesar and say, “Caesar is Lord.” And that is precisely what the Christians refused to do. For them Jesus Christ was the Lord, and to no man would they give that title which belonged to Christ.

    The Apostle Paul began his appeal under Claudius, but when Claudius was killed in 54 AD, Nero took his place, and had Paul beheaded.

    To have to suffer persecution is, as Jesus himself said, the way to walk the same road as the prophets, and the saints, and the martyrs have walked. To suffer for the right is to gain a share in great succession. The man who has to suffer something for his faith can throw back his head and say,

    “Brothers, we are treading where the saints have trod.”

    To suffer persecution is to make things easier for those who are to follow. Today we enjoy the blessing of liberty because men in the past were willing to buy it for us at the cost of blood, and sweat, and tears. They made it easier for us, and by a steadfast and immovable witness for Christ we make it easier for others who are still to come.

    The man who fights his battle for Christ will always make things easier for those who follow after. For them there will be one-less struggle to be encountered on the way.

    Still further, no man ever suffers persecution alone; if a man is called upon to bear material loss, the failure of friends, slander, loneliness, even the death of love, for his principles, he will not be left alone. Christ will be nearer to him than at any other time. (Barclay 114-117)

    Read more at – https://www.facebook.com/notes/george-walter-bratcher-iii/blessed-what-does-it-really-mean-why-did-jesus-say-it/10151339668041373

    YOU CAN ONLY submit to the laws of man in so far as they do not violate your faith in Jesus, for Paul was beheaded rather than to have violated his faith in Jesus as Lord.

    Big Progressive Nanny State Government is NOT LORD! Progressives believe you can only understand the Declaration of Independence without references to God, so for them, your rights are not endowed by your Creator, but come from the State, and when Big Progressive Nanny State Government can be your new god telling you how to walk, talk, and chew gum, what in Hades do you need a 1st amendment for in the first place?

    • Haqodeshim

      When your Government’s god is money, soon it is not just interested in forcing a small Christian business baker or florist to provide baked goods or floral arrangements for homosexuals marriage ceremonies, thus violating the first amendment, it moves for your children’s souls too!

      http://www.rightwingnews.com/uncategorized/ny-middle-school-forces-girls-to-ask-one-another-for-lesbian-kiss-and-pretend-like-they-are-on-a-date/

      Some production companies and some popular books, sell the notion that the Beast is coming and the last days are about to come, but in reality, they are already here.

      1% of America’s wealthy are millionaires or greater in wealth. 50% of the 1% reside in the SEVEN counties surrounding Washington, DC. So our Government is no longer a Republic, but rather a shadow illusion of one. What we have is an oligarchy that does not represent the 99% of the rest of the country.

      The current argument over homosexuality began with our Progressive Government, who’d much rather talk about it rather than reform taxation so marriage is not at the center of it as Rand Paul suggested before the Supreme Courts enabling of the Progressive agenda, nor stop the Progressive Government’s enslavement of the populace with their overspending; no instead they throw out the red herring of homosexual rights to redefine marriage which is none of their business instead of reforming themselves, their overspending and abusive taxation. They’ll push the homosexual agenda through the eye of the needle and strain out a gnat rather then pass a constitutional amendment requiring a balanced budget, so if you didn’t know what the Progressives agenda was before, you do now.

      The SEVEN hills of Babylon/Rome from Revelation are alive and well in the SEVEN counties surrounding Washington, DC, and they worship the BEAST/”love of money”!

      13“No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other,or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.”

      14 The Pharisees, who loved money, heard all this and were sneering at Jesus. 15 He said to them, “You are the ones who justify yourselves in the eyes of others, but God knows your hearts. What people value highly is detestable in God’s sight. – Luke 16 NIV;http://bible.com/111/luk.16.13-15.niv

      https://www.facebook.com/notes/george-walter-bratcher-iii/are-you-serving-god-or-money/10152129277556373

      • Haqodeshim

        Homosexuals are 1.5 percent of the population, and the 50% of the 1% in DC are driving their agenda to avoid reforming themselves, their overspending, and their over taxation and abuse of the populace, and the proof is neither a Republican nor Democrat controlled congress have yet to pass a balanced budget amendment to the US Constitution, like the State Constitutions in KY, TN, and IN, and others have so that Government can’t spend more than it takes in.

        But maybe its easier for some to let Big Progressive Nanny State Government provide (and even here they are lying as we are seeing with Obamacare as it unfolds) womb to the tomb healthcare (and with abortion the womb becomes the tomb, making billions for the abortionists after 56 million abortions since 1973) and that tells you how to walk, talk, and chew gum at the same time as your new god!

        Because when Big Progressive Nanny State Government can be your god, what in Hades do you need a 1st amendment for in the first place?

        If Government were to reform itself and take marriage out of the tax equation, then there is no need for Government to redefine it, and no need for homosexuals to worry about getting married and penalized on monetary benefits for not doing so.

        “Gay marriage is a lie.”
        “Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we’re going to do with marriage when we get there.”
        “It’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist.” (This statement is met with very loud applause.)

        “Gay Marriage is a Lie: Destruction of Marriage, Masha Gessen” –
        http://youtu.be/n9M0xcs2Vw4

        In the meantime, I rest my case on the godless agenda of Progressives (who desire to be your new god) who do not want to abide by a Republic, and would assume a fuller Oligarchy than the shadow one they already have if it were not for the US Constitution.

        • Haqodeshim

          Can you imagine officials at a middle school, junior high or high school setting aside a day to promote “tolerance” for heavy smoking and drinking among children? How about a day where teachers encourage kids to “embrace who they are,” pick up that crack pipe and give it a stiff toke?

          Neither can I. The public would go ballistic, and for good reason.

          But that hasn’t stopped officials in thousands of schools across the country from promoting other politically correct and socially “in-vogue” behaviors that – both statistically and manifestly – are every bit as dangerous as the aforementioned frowned-upon behaviors.

          To the consternation of “gay” activist flat-earthers and homosexual AIDS holocaust deniers everywhere, one such study, conducted by pro-”gay” researchers in Canada, was published in the International Journal of Epidemiology, or IJE, in 1997.

          While the medical consensus is that smoking knocks from two to 10 years off an individual’s life expectancy, the IJE study found that homosexual conduct shortens the lifespan of “gays” by an astounding “8 to 20 years” – more than twice that of smoking.

          Read all and more at – http://www.wnd.com/2008/04/61856/

          • Haqodeshim

            Todd Starnes: ·

            President Obama lied to the nation in 2008 when he said he opposed gay marriage for religious reasons, according to a new book by former political advisor David Axelrod.

            Time Magazine reports Obama even lied inside Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church.

            “I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said at the time. “Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

            He lied inside a church. He lied outside the church. He lied to the nation.

          • Haqodeshim

            Obama’s lies are like the Energizer Bunny unfortunately, they just go on, and on, and on, and on . Of course,we know who the Father of lies is, so much for Obama’s fake Christianity.

      • Robert H.

        Did you really just blame all of the country’s problems on gay?

        • Haqodeshim

          No, I blamed them on the 50% of the 1%. Here, go to this link – http://www.srareadinglabs.com/ – learn reading comprehension most students get in second grade, and then come back.

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    Bentley obviously understands his legal responsibilities as governor and is able to separate those from his personal beliefs, just as the constitution requires.

    • Gary

      Bentley is acting according to what he really believes. The “personal beliefs” that he claims to have do not exist.

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    The Plessy versus Ferguson and Dred Scott arguments are straw men arguments. Those rulings upheld the constitutionality of certain laws. They did not require that any state have such laws. Only that, if the state did, they were not unconstitutional. There was no ruling that any state was forced to “follow”. Any state was free to remove their segregation laws without violating any federal judicial ruling.

    That differs from the issue of same-gender marriage in which laws were deemed NOT to be constitutional. Therefore, continuing to enforce such laws would violate federal judicial rulings.

    From a legal standpoint, the issues are apples and oranges.

  • Jim Hargett

    Bentley is such an embarrassment to me since, in my many generations home state, Alabama has such a duplicitous governor! As I went to college at Alabama then worked there for a total of 25 years, I would have been a thorn to Bentley in Bentley’s Sunday School class.

    • Paul Hiett

      So, you’re upset that he’s following the law and allowing civil rights to move forward?

      • Jim Hargett

        “following the law”? Paul, get real! NOTHING in the constitution allows alternate marriages. Following the interpretation of the S.C.? We are a pathetic Republic to so little understand the foundational intent of our country. How I would enjoy bringing back from the dead a team of Declaration signers to clean house the Federal courts and be given unlimited time to replenish the courts!

        • Badkey

          Nothing in the constitution BANS “alternate marriages”.

          However, it does guarantee equal privileges, immunities, and protections to all citizens.

          • Gary

            All citizens have had equal privileges, immunities and protections under traditional marriage laws. Traditional marriage has never violated the US Constitution.

          • SFBruce

            I don’t know of a single person who supports marriage equality who wants “traditional marriage” to cease. You loose nothing if LGBT people gain more equality.

          • Gary

            Sure I do. The florist is an example. I am certain that you queers will attempt to use the legality of ssm and homosexuality to punish Christians. You already have.

          • Paul Hiett

            Once again you miss the mark. The florist broke a law. That was her choice to do so. Break laws in this country, and if caught, you should accept the consequences.

          • Gary

            The only reason that law exists is to try to force everyone to accept perverts. It is an immoral law. God does not require anyone to obey immoral laws. But, I would try to break them in such a way as not to be prosecuted by the evil government.

          • Paul Hiett

            If you want to break laws, go ahead…that’s your own immorality and lack of ethics shining through.

            IF your Bible is real, then great, enjoy Heaven when you get there. Until that time, we get to decide what is lawful, moral, and ethical…not your particular choice of religion.

          • Badkey

            Sweetcheeks, it’s no different than the special rights you get from the federal government.

            Condemning one and not the other marks you as a hypocrite.

            Reality is, you’re just angry that your religion and those who choose to follow it aren’t special anymore in many places, and becoming less so nationally.

          • Paul Hiett

            Well, except when blacks weren’t allowed to marry whites. Had to change “traditional marriage” laws back then too. But, I don’t expect you to know this.

          • Badkey

            They still do, even in Washington.

            You don’t want that. You want those like you, the ones that follow the christian mythology, to be treated “special” and given special dispensation from the law, even as you are protected by it.

            Gay marriage does not violate the constitution.

          • Paul Hiett

            And nor does it change anything about men and women still being allowed to marry, which baffles the mind as to why these folks are so upset.

            With a divorce rate that is nothing short of embarrassing (especially considering what the Bible says about divorce), I have to laugh at their hypocrisy regarding the “sanctity of marriage”.

        • Paul Hiett

          In case you missed it, the Treaty of Tripoli clearly says that this country is NOT a Christian nation. Sorry to burst your bubble on this one, but we were founded on the principle of “freedom of religion”, which does not mean that Christianity is the rule of the land. “By the people, and for the people”…I don’t see it saying “By the Christians, and for the Christians.”

          Educate yourself.

          • Crono478

            You keep on repeating this claim despite the fact that it is already refuted many times by several of us.

          • Paul Hiett

            The truth is and always will be the truth. Have you read up on the Treaty of Tripoli?

          • Crono478

            Yes, I have read the treaty a while ago after some of you mentioned it for first time. It stated that it was between two sovereign nations rather than between Christians vs Muslims. Declaration of Independence mentioned Creator which is God from Bible. It is also true that the Constitution did no mention about Him too.

            However, it was no secret that overwhelming majority of the population as well as elected officials were openly Christians. They passed many laws based on Bible too. Another example is, Northwest Ordinance of 1787 which prescribed Bible as textbooks in public schools in Northwest Terrority back then.

            I know you will refute this and claim that USA was not found on Christianity.

          • Badkey

            We are not a theocracy.

          • Crono478

            I didn’t say that we are a theocracy. You are right on this one.

          • Paul Hiett

            Whether they were founders or not, it makes no difference.

            Can you cite exactly what the treaty says in regards to the US being a Christian nation?

          • Crono478

            Of course, the answer is no. I already gave the answer to Badkey that we aren’t a theocracy.

            What I am trying to point out is that our nation was founded to have a representative democracy. Christianity had a strong influence on our government. At the same time, the founding fathers wanted to ensure that we have freedoms on many areas which includes religion.

            You could be a Christian and be elected to government offices. You could propose laws to outlaw various acts such as sodomy. There needed to be a majority to pass the laws. Also, these laws could be repealed.

          • Paul Hiett

            Yes, the key word is “repealed”. We are not a nation ruled by Christianity, or any other religion. We are a nation of people, who decide what is right and wrong. Those viewpoints change over time.

            People screamed and wailed and gashed their teeth when blacks were granted their rights, and they thought they had God on their side again. The parallels are amazing, but it boggles the mind that you can’t see that you are on the wrong side of the same thing.

          • Crono478

            Actually, God was on their side. The laws against blacks were unjust. It was against His Laws. While majority of people and elected officials were Christians when USA was found, you will want to thank them for the freedom you are given to believe in whatever you want to. There was no such thing as that in other nations, especially in Europe during that time.

          • Badkey

            Your ancestors would totally have disagreed with you.

            Judge Leon M. Bazile, echoing Johann Friedrich Blumenbach’s 18th-century interpretation of race, wrote:

            “Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.”

            This is the judge that found the Lovings guilty.

          • Crono478

            He was a unjust judge then. He didn’t even read Bible either. Bible says that we come from one race (Acts 17:26).

          • Badkey

            The point remains.

            Religion is not, thankfully, US law.

            Break the law all you guys wish… the consequences will be yours (as will the whining).

          • Paul Hiett

            I get that you claim that that slavery and racism and segregation were against “his laws”, but the truth is, they aren’t. Slavery is absolutely, 100% tolerated and supported in the Bible.

            The claims made by Christians in support of Jim Crow laws were made with the same conviction that you have now. It’s not hard to go back and see that.

            And yes, I am very thankful that here in the US I can choose to believe, or not believe. Just as you can. I am also thankful that your book is not the book we live by in this country. Equal rights should be for everyone, not just for a select few.

          • Crono478

            Yes, the slavery itself isn’t what is unjust. It is how laws were applied to slaves that were unjust. Scott Dred Decision is very good example. It was pretty much to say that each of them were 3/5 of a person and is a property of each slave master. Yes, you are correct that the Bible does not actually outlaw slavery. Rather, Bible explains how slaves and slave masters should treat each other. USA has outlawed slavery since the passage of 13th amendment.

            http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-slavery.html — This is a good read on what Bible has to say about this.

            Right, this is USA, everyone can choose to be Christians and pass laws based on that. They can choose not to be a Christian or any other religions and decide which laws to pass. This is how the government in USA work. In other words, there can be more and more people voice for laws that is not in line with Bible because they want them passed. They have this right. However, it does not shield us from any consequence that may come up with this. We reap what we sow.

          • Paul Hiett

            Christian laws won’t be passed because they won’t be in line with the Constitution. Jim Crow laws were widely supported by Christians, but clearly those laws were immoral. The majority should never be allowed to dictate to the minority laws that govern them.

            We should all be afforded the same rights that everyone gets. Race, gender, religious beliefs, and sexual orientation should never be allowed to be used to discriminate against others.

            Just like with segregation, the USSC will strike down this marriage ban federally, and secure equality for gays across the country. Mind you, this law does nothing negative to anyone. It takes away no ones rights, it changes no one’s marriage status. It does not force “gay marriage” onto anyone that doesn’t want it.

            Why is that such a bad thing?

          • Crono478

            You probably know that people would tell you that they are Christians but not all of them are really Christians. That was same thing back then too. John recorded this about them in 1 John 2:19.

            Even if USSC do strike down the current definition of marriage and open marriage to all same-sex couple, consequences associated with it will actually follow. God tells us that we shouldn’t be deceived, He will not be mocked. We will reap what we sow.

          • Paul Hiett

            Ah yes, the same, tired, worn out argument I’ve heard so many times from Christians about others. If another Christian does something you don’t agree with, claim they’re not real Christians. They say the same thing about you. Is it any wonder there are over 42,000 denominations of Christianity?

            Name one single consequence of allowing SSM?

          • Crono478

            No, it’s not about me “not agreeing” with a group of Christians. It is not about many many many denominations.

            What I am pointing out is, God explains when we are saved from our sins, we are definitely Christian. Also, He did say that there are people who says that they are Christians but they are not because they never confessed of their sins and asked God to forgive them for that.

            To allow SSM would mean a major departure from our society that is based on traditional family (Wife-Husband and children) which is based in Bible. We already have high divorce rate and breakdown of families. SSM marriage will exacerbate this further. Also, it is in direct disobedience to God too.

          • Paul Hiett

            But this country is not based on the Bible! Why can’t you see that we are not a theocracy? We are not ruled by your Bible. Christians do not get to say what rules we live under in this country. We all have a right to decide that, and right now, there are only 13 of 50 states that disagree with gay marriage.

            Furthermore, your claim that the divorce rate is high is absolutely true, but that’s from your “traditional” marriage folks…the man/woman couples out there. In truth, “traditional” marriage destroyed its value on its own many, many years ago. SSM was not a factor then, nor is it a factor now.

            So again, I ask you, can you tell me an actual consequence of gay marriage?

          • Crono478

            “But this country is not based on the Bible! Why can’t you see that we are not a theocracy?”

            I did tell you again and again that this nation is not based on theocracy. I’m not sure why you didn’t remember this.

            Like I said, our elected officials have choice NOT to pass laws that is in line with Bible but it does not shield us from consequences that may come up with this. There is a long history of unjust laws in many nations including ours. Consequences followed as well.

            Yes, many of traditional marriages were destroyed for various reasons. Adultery is most common cause of this. This is true and is one of our reminders that we live in a sinful world. Another consequence is moral relativism. Traditional marriage were long accepted for very long time with exceptions. In the history, every civilization allowed various kind of sins to be legalized such as abortion, homosexuality and so on to be legalized and they fell.

            Israel was one of them. That is why they were exiled to their captivity a long time ago. Roman Empire was another civilization that gradually allowed SSM to become legalized for everyone.

          • Paul Hiett

            Rome never legalized gay marriage. Ever. Homosexuality was a common practice, yes, and men could engage in such acts publicly with no loss of public image assuming they were the “top”. But, the fact remains gay marriage was never legalized in ancient Rome. The downfall of that society is well documented and had nothing to do with religion. In fact, when Rome fell, Christianity was the official religion, and gay marriage was actually banned. Your example falls way short.

            So again, I ask, can you name a consequence of legalized SSM?

          • Crono478

            I already said it. It’s two words, first starts the letter, “M” and the second starts with the letter, “R”. Read above.

          • Paul Hiett

            Moral Relativism? Really? Christians have long since sullied the name of “traditional marriage”. You have no ground to stand on by claiming that gay marriage will erode the values of such. Again, invalid point since Christianity already destroyed the value, and I pointed out to you that Rome did not fall due to it.

          • Crono478

            Yes, many of us including some Christians (remember, if we are already saved, we still sin daily) fall victim to moral relativism. I do have the ground to stand on by claiming that gay marriage will erode the value of such. That is, God’s words that I am standing on.

            What is your ground that you are standing on, that leads you to believe that approval of SSM is not a problem?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “by claiming that gay marriage will erode the value of such. ”

            In what way will allowing two citizens of the same gender to enter into legal status of marriage “erode the value of” marriage?

          • Paul Hiett

            Hard to believe with the high divorce rate among heterosexuals that anyone could think that SSM would erode the value of marriage any further.

          • Badkey

            What is your ground that you are standing on, that leads you to believe that approval of SSM is a problem, that has any relevance whatsoever?

            How has it caused ANY tangible harm?

            How has it changed ANY marriage between a man and woman?

            Your god’s word is NOT CIVIL LAW. It’s nothing but a choice you made.

          • Crono478

            I am not asking you this question, I am asking Paul this question.

          • Badkey

            It’s a public forum, hotshot.

            My statement stands.

          • Badkey

            Oh, my questions stand as well.

          • Paul Hiett

            You stand by Gods word, words formed by man and put to paper. However, it remains a fact that nothing will change for you if SSM is legalized.

            In fact, I can stand on the ground of the 37 states that allow it, and the multitude of countries that allow it. I don’t see Canada falling into chaos, do you?

            Can you name one state or country, just one, that currently allows SSM, that has also fallen into such chaos?

            The ground I stand on is one of observation, not supposition.

          • Crono478

            Do you know that your words are exactly like a scoffer who believes that nothing will happen if SSM is approved by Supreme court for all of US states. You stand your ground on observation. If you observe that something actually changes, you would go along with it. It would go on and on.

            Also, you believe that my belief is simply a supposition. Yet, God’s words does not really change at all. Even our conscience will never change.

          • Badkey

            What will happen?

            Please… I’ve been begging for someone to fill us in.

            What will happen?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “Do you know that your words are exactly like a scoffer who believes that nothing will happen if SSM is approved by Supreme court for all of US states. ”

            I can’t imagine that anyone would think that nothing would happen if gender restrictions on marriage are removed in all states. That is certainly not the case. Many things will happen.

            What is it you think will happen, Crono?

          • Crono478

            Thanks for pointing this out. I meant to say that it’s like a scoffer believes that nothing bad will happen if SSM is approved.

            More things will happen in this country, not that it’s going to be good news for us. I can only pray that more of us will hear the gospel that leads us to our repentance and find salvation in Jesus.

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            “believes that nothing bad will happen if SSM is approved”

            What do you believe will happen that is “bad”?

          • Crono478

            Good morning to you. Yes, more harm will come out of this.

            1) Moral Relativism – I explained what it is in my previous comments to other person.
            2) If marriage is opened up to same-sex couples rather than a man and woman, there will be nothing to prevent more people from seeking for equity for other kinds of marriage such as one that involves at least 3 people or between an animal and a human. Don’t be surprised if they justify their reason for this equality on the ground that what they do is out of love. This is really related to moral relativism. They do what they think is right for them. There is no real solid ground for this since such views always change all the time.

          • Paul Hiett

            Oh, one other point…Christianity itself has long been accepted as one of the reasons that western Rome fell. Odd, isn’t it, that you claim non-Christian values are why Rome fell, when in fact Christianity actually helped it fall?

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Neither slavery nor segregation were “immoral” in any objective sense; they just don’t line up with modern secular thinking. It is absurd to argue that something sanctioned and regulated in the Bible is “immoral”, unless you are an atheist, in which case, I’m not interested in your opinion.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            Well, in case you missed it, the Supreme Court stated in 1892 that we ARE a Christian nation. “…the case assumes that we are a Christian people, and the morality of
            the country is deeply engrafted upon Christianity, and not upon the
            doctrines or worship of those impostors”. Also, “These, and many other matters which might be noticed, add a volume of
            unofficial declarations to the mass of organic utterances that this is a
            Christian nation.”. Feeling educated yet?

  • Ann Bonacci

    Gods laws ARE the final and only word on any subject, period….for He is the creator of ALL things – anyone who disagrees is simply a fool and the word is not in them

    • Paul Hiett

      There are 4200+ religions in the world, Ann…can you please tell me why only the followers of your particular choice of religion should be afforded civil rights?

      • UnreconstructedRebel

        Gee, I dunno. Maybe because Christianity happened to be the one out of 4200 that shaped and created W Civilization since the 4th century AD?

    • Badkey

      So, you promote a theocracy in America?

  • thoughtsfromflorida

    “Would you have followed the order in Dred Scott saying that black people were property? Or would you have followed the order in Plessy versus Ferguson that says separate but equal was the policy of the United States?” Moore asked.

    That is a straw man argument. The rulings in those cases did not require the states to do anything. All it did was say that the states which currently had such laws in place were allowed to keep them in place. So there was nothing to “follow”. Each state was free to remove these laws if it cared to.

    To compare a ruling which allowed something to continue to a ruling which forbids something, is apples and oranges.

    Putting forth such an argument is disingenuous.

    • Paul Hiett

      Just because a state has a law doesn’t mean that law is “right”. This is why we are allowed to change the laws in this country, both federally and at the state level. That’s the beauty of a government not bound by any religious ideology…we can modify our laws to better fit humanity as we go along.

      The Jim Crow laws are a great example of this.

      • thoughtsfromflorida

        Society’s view of what is “right” most certainly changes over time.

        • Paul Hiett

          Yes, we move towards equality for everyone with each passing generation.

          Isn’t that a good thing?

          • thoughtsfromflorida

            I certainly believe so.

          • UnreconstructedRebel

            No, “equality for everyone” is not a good thing. It’s radial egalitarianism, just another aspect of secular humanism. It is exactly the sort of thinking that has got us to the point we are now. If everyone is “equal”, then how can you deny gay’s “equal rights” to marry. Equality is NOT something the law should concern itself with; it is impossible to achieve and the attempt to enforce by law has led to the destruction of traditional American society over the past 50 years. Give me hierarchy, tradition and inequality any day over the godless confusion that is running rampant in America in the name of “equality”

        • Gary

          But society has no authority to define right and wrong.

  • David Horger

    “No enactment of man can be considered law unless it conforms to the law of God.” William Blackstone

    • Paul Hiett

      Would you care to explain why Christians should be the only ones afforded equal rights then?

      • Gary

        Christians are not the only ones afforded equal rights. What do Christians get to do that you don’t?

    • Badkey

      Alluah Akbar!!!

  • Ann Bonacci

    It is written…’The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.’

    • Paul Hiett

      Yeah, and did you know that a lot of other religions have things written about them too?

    • Badkey

      Our civil law is not your religion.

  • Ann Bonacci

    Badkey…God loves us too much to leave us where we are, but it IS up to us to make a choice, for life (with Him for eternity) or for death (separated from Him for all eternity)….for it is written: ‘For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life’…John 3:16

    • Paul Hiett

      Quoting the Bible is not proof of the Bible, by the way.

  • Ann Bonacci

    read the whole thing for yourselves….most who are perishing in their non-belief, sadly will not

    • Paul Hiett

      Do tell, what is so bad about believing something different than another person?

      • Gary

        If it isn’t bad to believe differently from you, why do you keep telling people they are wrong?

  • OldArkie

    Sad, we’ve got many professing Christians who will obey man instead of God.

    Ac 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

    They fear that if the refuse to obey man, they will suffer.

    1Pe 3:14 But and if ye suffer for righteousness’ sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled;

    These refuse to be happy when they suffer for the sake of our God. They refuse to give up money, position, and friendship with the world for our wonderful God.

    Jas 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God

    Sound as if this governor of Alabama is at enmity with God, that is standing against God and standing with man helping them to enjoy their sins against our ‘Great God.’

    Lets hold fast to what God teaches us to do.

    Heb 10:23 Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering; (for he is faithful that promised;)

    His promise is to be faithful, so let us be faithful too, no matter the cost. And be assured those who are faithful will store up many treasures in Heaven.

    Lu 6:46 And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?

    Why would anyone professing Jesus as their Lord not do the things which He says to do?
    Perhaps Matthew 7:21,22,23, will explain this.

    • Paul Hiett

      So are you calling for Christians to break the law?

      • OldArkie

        Calling Christians to obey God, not man.

        • Paul Hiett

          Sure, if Heaven is real…but until they die, everyone is subject to the laws of man. If you choose to live here, you obey the laws, or suffer the consequences.

          Pretty simple, and it’s fair.

          • OldArkie

            The worse consequence you can do is kill me, and if you kill me them the next moment I will be in heaven with God, so you will have done me a favor.

            Php 1:21 For to me to live is Christ, and to die is gain.

            So the consequences is not bad at all. But what about your consequences? Will your consequences be as the rich man?

            Luke 16:21,22,23
            21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.
            22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;

            23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

            Lazarus was in comfort, the rich man was in torment, Jesus can save you from the torment in the everlasting fire.

            Your choice.

          • Badkey

            Allahua Akbar!

            You’re no different than your muslim cousins.

          • Paul Hiett

            I have no interest in your book, or the tales it tells. I care about what is on this earth, in this life. You have no more proof of the afterlife than any other religion, and so what matters is how we live life here and now, and how we treat others.

            Christianities track record on that is pretty muddy…

          • OldArkie

            That’s your choice, yet if you wind up on a death bed slowly dying you will them think about what is on the other side of death.

          • Paul Hiett

            Everyone does, it’s a natural thing, since it’s an absolute unknown. I know even you wonder that too…

          • Gary

            Why are your beliefs right and the beliefs of Christians wrong?

    • Robert H.

      And how many concubines are we allowed to have again? Did Jesus ever say they were off limits? Jews supposedly paraded around for 40 years burning cities and turning their women and young girls into slaves.

  • Ann Bonacci

    bad? depends on what you believe….if it isn’t Gods truth, then it’s ‘bad’ for you, ultimately

    • Paul Hiett

      Psst…you can hit the reply button to continue a “conversation”, rather than a new post each time.

      So 2/3’s of the worlds population believe in “bad” things? Really?

      • Ann Bonacci

        2/3’s of the world? I wouldn’t be surprised if it was higher than that….’narrow is the path, and few who find it’
        Subject: Re: Comment on Alabama’ s Sunday School Teacher Turned Governor: I Will Obey ‘ Gay Marriage’ Ruling Over God’ s Law

        • Paul Hiett

          Well, it all depends on what you call a Christian. There are 42,000+ denominations…I doubt you all agree on the same things.

          • Ann Bonacci

            the bible does not divide believers into denominations…that is mans doing….does not make it good or bad…but to be a Christian to me is to have a personal one on one relationship with Jesus Christ who I believe died to pay the penalty for my sins and because of that I do strive to live my life for Him…and I believe the bible from front to back that it is the infallible word of God…I am not perfect nor will I ever be on this earth, but I cannot remain in any on going sin because He lives in me and it does not fit who I am…for many many years…I did not come to this decision because I was blessed to have a normal upbringing (I did not) or parents that believed (I did not)….He pursued me and saved me and forgave me….how can I not love someone who has done the ultimate sacrifice for me, loves me unconditionally even though I’ve failed Him over and over, and who has never ever given up on me or left me despite my unworthiness….there is not a greater love this side of heaven and I have not only experienced it for many years but I have been blessed to have seen Him in a vision and a miracle followed….that happened just 7 years ago, but I’ve been a ‘christian’ since I was 9 years old…so I’m not basing my belief on that one incident either….it’s not about going to church regularly (which I do, because there might be someone there who needs my smile, or a hug or to hear I care – bible says ‘do not forsake the gathering of yourselves together’ – it is to be a body of like minded believers who hold each other up and encouraging one another); and it’s not about reading the bible every day (which I do because if you want to know God and His Son, then read His words…kind of like trying to put something together and make it work doesn’t make sense unless you read the ‘user manual’); and it’s not about being good (for no one is good, all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God – but what you do should be an outward manifestation of what you believe – after all, you will know them by their ‘fruits’) – the word Christian is in the bible…(the disciples were first called christians in Antioch) – it’s like if you are married to the most wonderful person for you in the world: would you spend time with them? absolutely, as much as you could – would you show them that you love them? absolutely, for words without actions means nothing – would you defend them against others? absolutely, you defend what you love most – so in essence I am a child of the most high God, joint heir with Jesus Christ – just like He says in His word – and this same offer is for all of mankind – no coercion, no threatening, no bullying – Gods word is very clear on what our decision either way will bring us – again, our choice – free will – after all, if you really love someone you don’t ‘force’ them to love you – or it is not real love.
            Subject: Re: Comment on Alabama’ s Sunday School Teacher Turned Governor: I Will Obey ‘ Gay Marriage’ Ruling Over God’ s Law

          • Paul Hiett

            Which is all fine and good…and I support that belief of yours. I support the right for everyone to believe in whatever religion they so choose, even the right not to believe in a religion.

            What I don’t support, is when a religion thinks it’s better than everyone else, and gets to decide the rules. You wouldn’t tolerate Sharia law being implemented, and so too I reject the premise of Christian law.

            Freedom of religion is also freedom FROM religion. You would not tolerate an atheistic or Islamic or Jewish regime, and so should not expect others to accept a Christian regime.

            I completely understand that you believe we’re all sinners and all going to Hell, but we don’t share that view, and we should all be afforded the same rights and protections that you enjoy. Equality for everyone should be the goal of humanity, not “which religion is better” than another.

            That’s what marriage equality is about…something I think slips from the mind of the religious.

          • Ann Bonacci

            you keep saying ‘religious’ and ‘religion’ when I said it was about a relationship….but equality does not mean you have a license to sin….and if Gods word calls it a sin, then sin it is….no government or law of the land is going to change that…ever
            Subject: Re: Comment on Alabama’ s Sunday School Teacher Turned Governor: I Will Obey ‘ Gay Marriage’ Ruling Over God’ s Law

        • BarkingDawg

          And you are just so special.

  • Elaine Perkins

    Well, I guess that means that when Sharia Law comes to the WH, that Governor Bentley will support Sharia Law for Alabama.

    • Paul Hiett

      Oh yes, that’s exactly what it means!

      /facepalm

  • Dwayne Burkett

    we must obey God rather than men……….Acts 5:29

    • Paul Hiett

      Do you drive as fast as you want?

  • Janine P Barkler

    What would he do if he were instructed by the government officials to follow the Muslim rule of law? Does he blindly follow man without fearing the wrath of an angry God who made and gave us the first law of the land?

    • BarkingDawg

      Since that would never happen, your supposition is pointless.

    • Gary

      He said he would do anything a federal judge told him to do. Anything.

    • Badkey

      Bingo!!!

  • pastoredsmith

    I had high hopes for Bentley. He has turned out to be a wimp. He is a hypocrite and a coward and should be voted out. A liar in office is nothing less than a travesty.

  • David Allen

    Sad America Truly Forgotten that America Was Founded On Christianity but I Guess When God Judges America As He Had With Sodom And Gomorrah Then They Will Remember!

  • UnreconstructedRebel

    So this man says that he won’t take a stand against the desecration of the divine institution of marriage because it might make Alabama “look bad” and hinder job recruitment? He’s an embarrassment to the South and disgrace to the faith. One wonders what he would have done if he had been a Roman prefect during the Diocletian persecutions? “Well, I don’t approve of sewing Christians into animal skins and sending wild beasts to rip them to pieces for public amusement, but we have to obey the law, and I would want to make my province look bad”.

  • Evangelina Vigilantee

    Exactly, God’s laws trump man’s laws. We must obey God over man when a conflict exists. God is our authority. It is never okay to disobey God just to obey man made laws, even to escape persecuton. This is where the test of being a true Christian begins; where the rubber meets the road. They will try to tell you that this is ‘God-ordained’ government, but Hitler did the same thing and look how that went down. More puppets will pop up, paving the way for believers to submit to this, with well scripted deceptions. Be prepared church; the time is here to stand for Jesus or to deny Him. The truth is the truth. Your decision says nothing about the truth, which is unchangeable, but it says everything about your loyalty to God and where you are with Him today. Pray for strength; the lions are coming out of their dens.

  • Tamela Beckman

    If Governor Bentley was around in the time of the disciples then he would have said ..,,Oh,…okay” when told to not preach in Jesus’ Name anymore…would not want to disobey any laws…but those disciples said we must obey God and not Man. And thus THE GOSPEL WENT FORTH…and even reached his little Baptist church there in Tuscaloosa, Alabama…….hmmmmmm…so is Mr. Bentley really saved or not?

  • OldArkie

    “MONTGOMERY, Ala. – The governor of Alabama, who formerly served as a deacon and Sunday school teacher at the Baptist church where he remains a member, says that he will obey the recent federal court ruling striking down the state’s Sanctity of Marriage Act as being unconstitutional.”

    He should never have been a deacon nor taught Sunday school nor a governor. For he obeys man over God. He is a weakling, he has not place all of his faith in Jesus. If all his faith was placed in Jesus, he would trust and obey knowing that if he suffers for trusting and obeying, he would be suffering for the one who suffered from him on the cross so that he could be born again having that wonderful ‘blessed hope’ Yet few of us will suffer for the sake of our Savior. We demand only blessings, riches, and no suffering for the sake of our precious Savior.

    The very sad thing is this is exactly what most all politicians do that makes the claim to be a saved person them once they are elected refusing to trust and obey our Lord while breaking the promises they’ve made to the voters.