| 0 |
Subject: New World Order
Posted by: Baldwin
- [132854] Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 12:35
"Now, we can see a new world coming into view – a world in which there is the very real prospect of a New World Order," - George Herbert Walker Bush, March 6, 1991
"All nations must come together to build a stronger, global regime," - Barack Obama, G-20 meeting, 2009 |
| 1 | Perm Dude
ID: 336813
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 12:37
|
This scares you, doesn't it? Cooperation between governments is your slippery slope.
|
| 2 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 12:39
|
The phrase "New World Order" does bother me since one of the first politicians to use it was Hitler.
|
| 3 | sarge33rd
ID: 30356715
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 12:41
|
I'd wager, it was probably first used by a Roman Emporer, an early Pope, or even someone along the ilk of an Alexander the Great. (I also believe, Ric Flair said something akin to that several times, a couple decades ago.)
|
| 4 | Seattle Zen
ID: 7348911
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 12:51
|
Hey, sarge, where ya been? How's it going? I've been meaning to ask you about the auto finance industry, is it as bad as it seems? You usually are around here to tell us just how bad things are, but you've been gone, I'm curious.
Far more interesting than Baldwin's delusional tripe.
|
| 5 | sarge33rd
ID: 30356715
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 12:57
|
how is it?? Horrible, atrocious, fvcking scarey...all gross understatements.
Making less in a quarter now, than I made in 2 weeks, 2 years ago. Savings gone, cashed out the 401k yesterday so I can pay bills thru the end of June/July. Things dont change by Aug 1.......*shrug*
How are they for you?
|
| 6 | Seattle Zen
ID: 7348911
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 13:13
|
Bad. You are not alone.
|
| 7 | sarge33rd
ID: 30356715
Thu, Apr 09, 2009, 13:34
|
To be honest, I'm sorry to hear that. Be a hell of a lot easier if I were alone, and it were the result of bad choices/actions on my own part.
|
| 8 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 06:10
|
Also used by the founding father's and put on the great seal of the United States in Latin "Novus Ordo Seclorum". It's actually a masonic phrase.
As far as Baldwin being delusional, I would have to say not on this issue. It's obvious to anyone with their eyes opened we are at least attempting to move toward a more controlled and homogeneous world order. I mean how much more obvious can it be?
Countries that don't get with the program like North Korea, Saddam's Iraq and Iran are dealt with.
All the things I was told would be happening back in the 80's, before any of it had started, are taking place.
So much of what Cooper stated would happen has, 1) A major terrorist attack that will be used to take away constitutional rights, 2) a massive economic collapse that would be used to bring about elements of socialism. 3) Politicians pushing us toward a world government.
The world government part might still be 30 40 years away, but they have been taking steps the last 10-15 years to implement global consensus and rules in baby steps if you will.
You can be smug and say that's not what's happening, but then, if it talks like a duck and walks like a duck, some of us assume it's a...
It has nothing to do with Obama, the events were well in place before he took office. He's just going along with the program.
I've said it here for years. We will end up a socialist country because it is all part of the master plan.
Now the question everyone has to decide for themselves is, is this a good thing or a bad thing? I accept the fact there are two sides to the issue and honest and intelligent people can disagree on the answer.
Let's not stare what is obviously happening in the face, and call those who see it delusional (Not that Baldwin doesn't have plenty of delusional moments)
Everything happening has not only been predicted, it's been flatly guaranteed "this is what will happen".
Who was the last one with the Anthony Sutton Skull and Bones book who was supposed to pass it on who has just sat on it all these years? Nice way to stop that debate.
I guess I would say to Baldwin, shouldn't the nations try to work together? Get along better? Live in peace and find ways to cooperate more.
The fear of the anti "New World Order" crowd is that the outcome will be 1) a socialist planet, 2) Loss of freedoms we take for granted. 3) US submitting to a world court to create global laws we may not like... the list goes on.
I can even see it happening here. Dubai outlaws smoking in all public places. Why? Because they think it's a good idea? The reason given is to come into compliance with the United Nations health guidelines (Paraphrasing) smoking is a way of life here (unfortunately), yet even here they "get with the program".
|
| 9 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 08:11
|
Sarge hang in there, sorry to hear how bad it's gotten.
Every time I think it's slow over here I hear a story like yours and realize things aren't that bad here.... yet.
|
| 10 | sarge33rd
ID: 1831107
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 08:20
|
That we as a species will ultimately move toward a united planetary government, doesn't surprise me at all. I just don''t see such a movement as part of a conspiracy, so much as a natural evolution of human society. Nothing sinister to it, and certainly no "grand plan". Just evolution, doing what it does.
|
| 11 | Boxman
ID: 3821468
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 09:01
|
Nothing sinister to it, and certainly no "grand plan".
And so where does a person migrate to if they don't like the value system of the country (or in this case planet) they live in?
|
| 12 | sarge33rd
ID: 1831107
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 09:02
|
Mars? Venus? A lot of people don't like 'something' about where they are. Doesn't mean that leaving 'there', is the only viable option.
|
| 13 | Boxman
ID: 3821468
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 09:30
|
Doesn't mean that leaving 'there', is the only viable option.
Tell that to the people of: Rwanda 15 years ago, Darfur today, Soviet Russia 30 years ago, East Germany, North Korea today, the Native Americans 200 years ago, the Jews in Germany in the 1930s and 1940s, Cambodia under Pol Pot, the Kurds in Iraq in the 80s, black people in the US and then mainly southern US from 1776 to about 1960, the Armenians in Turkey, gays in Iran, women who don't want to wear a burka anywhere in the Middle East practically, women who want equal treament basically anywhere in the Middle East.................................................................................................
|
| 14 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 10:10
|
That we as a species will ultimately move toward a united planetary government, doesn't surprise me at all. I just don''t see such a movement as part of a conspiracy, so much as a natural evolution of human society. Nothing sinister to it, and certainly no "grand plan". Just evolution, doing what it does.
Were the romans and conspiracy, were the Monguls a conspiracy? And does it matter? In one case the Romans created a there own version of new world order that united Europe and lead to a golden age, while the the golden horde left an eastern europe that never really recovered. Maybe there is natural progression to unity there is also a natural progression to break apart and be unique.
|
| 15 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 12:10
|
I think Box makes a good point in post 13.
To an extent it's less of a conspiracy today then it was in the 80's and before because what we've all been telling everyone was the plan, and what the future held, is every year coming more and more into the light.
|
| 16 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 12:15
|
I just don''t see such a movement as part of a conspiracy, so much as a natural evolution of human society. Nothing sinister to it, and certainly no "grand plan".
But Sarge you are missing the point. It most certainly has been a plan.
Information and details about it leaked out over the years and people who predicted it because they either had insider information, or knew someone who did) were labeled "conspiracy theorists" (or kooks) because it wasn't a plan that was openly discussed in political discourse.
Yet many of the concepts the conspiracy theorists claimed to have inside knowledge of are coming true every year.
Maybe they just got really lucky.
|
| 17 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 13:05
|
Information and details about it leaked out over the years and people who predicted it because they either had insider information, or knew someone who did) were labeled "conspiracy theorists" (or kooks) because it wasn't a plan that was openly discussed in political discourse.
but where is the conspiracy? If there is conspiracy who are its leaders? what where they trying to hide? What is the end game?
|
| 18 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 15:24
|
I guess I would say to Baldwin, shouldn't the nations try to work together? Get along better? Live in peace and find ways to cooperate more. - Nerve
What nations? As Strobe Talbot and every other candid CFR member has clearly stated, what is sought for is the end of the nation state, to be supplanted by world federalism.
The reason one world government is disasterous, is that there is absolutely no check on any bad idea that occurs to the dictators that inherit that kind of unlimited power.
Dictators and men who play god are really really great at coming up with horrors when there is no one to stay their hand.
Especially dictators with a planet full of 'too many people'.
Mankind will be crushed by death camps and Orwellian tortures until the end of time...
...or until God's Kingdom and the end of human mismanagement.
|
| 19 | Perm Dude
ID: 9330102
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 15:29
|
Recognizing the worth of other countries is not the same as advocating "one world government." It isn't even close. And continuing to insist that it does paints you as a paranoid looney.
|
| 20 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 15:33
|
The reason one world government is disasterous, is that there is absolutely no check on any bad idea that occurs to the dictators that inherit that kind of unlimited power.
Dictators and men who play god are really really great at coming up with horrors when there is no one to stay their hand.
Then it will dissolve away. This is still not an explanation to how this is a conspiracy. If this about power, well power is based on conflict, not on peace.
a planet full of 'too many people'.
by the way this is a true statement.
|
| 21 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 15:38
|
They'd none of them be missed.
|
| 22 | sarge33rd
ID: 1831107
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 15:54
|
re 14: ...while the the golden horde left an eastern europe that never really recovered.
I owuld STRONGLY suggest you revisit Genghis Kahns actual history. He united several disparate warring tribes/clans, conquered and assimilated peoples of vastly different religions/cultures and was pretty much the first to introduce the concept of religious freedom. (It was largely why he was so successful in assimilating differing cultures.) Genghis, left an empire whose peoples were vastly better off than they had been before. His sons/grandsons, are the ones who via petty bickering, squandered it all away.
As for eastern Europe, Genghis was not really successful in his efforts to conquer/assimilate that area. Throughout SE Asia and south central Asia however, he found unprecedented successes.
|
| 23 | sarge33rd
ID: 1831107
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 15:56
|
Yet many of the concepts the conspiracy theorists claimed to have inside knowledge of are coming true every year.
DaVinci predicted air travel and submarines and we have those today. Does that mean they were the result of a conspiracy? No, it means we as a people evolved. Same here, IMHO.
|
| 24 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 16:08
|
Boikin
I refer you to H G Well's 'The Open Conspiracy'.
|
| 25 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 16:37
|
Re: 22, I think you might want to check your facts the golden horde/Genghis khan was never in SE asia. the monguls did grant religious freedom as long as they still got paid. they did not unify anyone, they did the opposite they kept people separated and waring so that they could never unify against them. the results of this efforts are still visible through out eastern europe. The Romans used the opposite approach by trying to build common language and costumes through out. The results of these policies are still seen through out western Europe.
I refer you to H G Well's 'The Open Conspiracy'. I think sarge covered that and that is not a conspiracy no more than the founding of Christianity was one.
|
| 26 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 17:31
|
Wow.
Boldwin and Nerve are the only ones to acknowledge a similar point to the one I made in 13. I guess wholesale slaughter and genocide isn't too much of a concern.
Next time someone calls Boldwin nuts I'll remember the audience that does so.
|
| 27 | DWetzel at work
ID: 49962710
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 17:33
|
Think maybe you could tone down the rhetoric just a weeeeee bit so we can have an intelligent discussion?
|
| 28 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 18:02
|
Why is pointing out the objective fact of genocide on the scale of 100,000,000 per each of several countries, the genocide of a fourth of a population, ongoing genicides and death camps...
Why is that the enemy of intelligent conversation?
I'd say avoiding that 800# gorilla in the room when discussing human governments, is the definition of avoiding intelligent political discussion.
Unless you are eager to repeat them.
|
| 29 | sarge33rd
ID: 1831107
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 18:18
|
why the apparent assumption, that a unified global government would necessarily be that of a despot? Your entire contention, is that mass genocide would automatically follow as night does day. Is it not even within the realm of possibility, that a unified government, which I think is at LEAST 100+ years away, would be a "free" republic not unlike our own?
|
| 30 | sarge33rd
ID: 1831107
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 18:22
|
re 25, I'd include China in SE Asia, and Genghis Khan most certainly did assimilate large portions of China.
link
I'll refer you to this fine piece on Genghis...
Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World
|
| 31 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 20:15
|
Is it not even within the realm of possibility, that a unified government, which I think is at LEAST 100+ years away, would be a "free" republic not unlike our own?
In a scant paragraph I cited governments from almost every corner of the globe across a large time span. Even our "free" republic is guilty of atrocities. A global one gives people nowhere to turn.
|
| 32 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 20:16
|
Sarge
1) It's just human nature given unlimited power.
2) Insider informers like George Orwell have told us exactly how they think.
|
| 33 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Fri, Apr 10, 2009, 20:18
|
3) And for those few who believe the Bible, because it is described as a beast.
|
| 34 | DWetzel
ID: 33337117
Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 13:36
|
Why is pointing out the objective fact of genocide on the scale of 100,000,000 per each of several countries, the genocide of a fourth of a population, ongoing genicides and death camps...,
Where have these things actually taken place on the scale that you state them in?
Because if they have, they would be facts.
Now, it's possible, though unlikely, that my math is way off, but I do not believe events of this scale to have taken place at this point in human history.
Which would make mention of them one or more of speculation, hyperbole, and/or strawman, but emphatically not "objective fact".
And stating them as "objective fact", and not as one of those other hypotheticals, IS the enemy of intelligent discussion.
Which is not to say, of course, that those would not be Very Bad Things--clearly they would be. But there has been nothing from a logical perspective to indicate that 1. A global government would bring these things about; 2. A number of non-global governments greater than one would prevent these things from coming about.
In fact, I'm pretty sure that every event of genocide in the history of the world has come about under a non-global government system. Correct, or not?
|
| 35 | Perm Dude
ID: 193231017
Sat, Apr 11, 2009, 17:53
|
Richard Poplawski was also obsessed with "one world government."
|
| 36 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 05:43
|
D'wets
Yes, both the USSR and China murdered over 100 million of their own citizens over the course of decades. Pol Pot killed a fourth of his population.
These figures are sometimes minimized by sixties liberals who more or less supported and made the world safe for those projects.
|
| 37 | boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 10:28
|
re 25, I'd include China in SE Asia, and Genghis Khan most certainly did assimilate large portions of China.
You are correct about china, I dont think it is technically part of SE Asia, but that is neither here not there.
Why is pointing out the objective fact of genocide on the scale of 100,000,000 per each of several countries, the genocide of a fourth of a population, ongoing genicides and death camps...
But why? I will admit the world is over populated but that is not reason for these mass genicides....Use some logic and science to justify these rantings.
|
| 38 | Razor
ID: 371502414
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 12:25
|
These figures are sometimes minimized by sixties liberals who more or less supported and made the world safe for those projects.
In another year, we will be 50 years removed from the beginning of the 60's. Bout time to stop shaking your fist at the sixty's liberals, no? All the hippies you grew up and became real people a long time ago.
|
| 39 | Razor
ID: 371502414
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 12:27
|
Yes, both the USSR and China murdered over 100 million of their own citizens over the course of decades.
And FYI for anyone who may believe this, Baldwin is notorious for having no clue about the scale of things. He once claimed that there could be 100 million undocumented aliens in the US.
|
| 40 | DWetzel at work
ID: 49962710
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 12:34
|
I was about to ask for some documentation, because my cursory searches came up with numbers that were orders of magnitude smaller. (Not that a few hundred thousand dead here and there doesn't still qualify as a Very Bad Thing, of course.)
|
| 41 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 14:56
|
Baldwin can you document the 100,000,000 number anywhere other then your imagination? If so please link to it.
Pity conspiracy view of history gets muddied up by the lunatics when it's otherwise so obvious and logical.
|
| 42 | Seattle Zen
ID: 443561314
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 16:12
|
Baldwin can you document the 100,000,000 number anywhere other then your imagination?
Well, if you include "death by natural causes", then I think you could reach 100Mil...
And everyone knows that the stinkin' Reds are behind those so called "natural causes".
|
| 43 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 16:25
|
One of my past computers had such a rigorous compilation of atrocities in it's favorites. I'll have to research it once again.
With the proviso of course that the bastards who allowed the Cambodia holocaust and in fact made excuses for them, until they no longer could, will of course minimize their guilt.
The liberals who shilled for every propaganda ploy of the USSR of course will attempt to minimize their guilt.
|
| 44 | DWetzel at work
ID: 49962710
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 16:37
|
Well, in some cases, the natural causes may not be so natural (see, and apologies for Wiki-ing my research, Holodomor as an example).
Still, though, I'm having trouble coming up with the math, even if you combine this with pretty much all the other Soviet disasters put together.
|
| 45 | Pancho Villa
ID: 233231222
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 18:24
|
the bastards who allowed the Cambodia holocaust and in fact made excuses for them
Do these bastards have names?
|
| 46 | Perm Dude
ID: 193231017
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 18:25
|
Yes. They are on a list in Karl Rove's pocket.
|
| 47 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 18:50
|
There used to be a very rigorous site called 'the red list' as I recall it, but I haven't had the time to relocate it yet.
|
| 48 | biliruben
ID: 461142511
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 19:21
|
Would that site be a quarry, and would those lists be on stone tablets?
Only saying because you seem to spend majority of your time howling about "liberals" that held sway back in the era before all them tubes starting sending information around the webs.
When you complain about something that happened a mere 20 years ago, it's breaking news. Usually you are stuck 50 years ago or more complaining about Hanoi Jane and such.
|
| 49 | Pancho Villa
ID: 233231222
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 20:01
|
There used to be a very rigorous site called 'the red list'
Here's a very rigorous site that is probably a bit more objective than the 'the red list.'
Under Prince Sihanouk, Cambodia had preserved neutrality during the Vietnamese civil war by giving a little to both sides: Vietnamese communists were allowed to use a Cambodian port to ship in supplies, the USA were allowed to bomb - secretly and illegitimately - Viet Cong hideouts in Cambodia. When US-backed Lon Nol took over, US troops felt free to move into Cambodia to continue their struggle with the Viet Cong. Cambodia had become part of the Vietnam battlefield. During the next four years, American B-52 bombers, using napalm and dart cluster-bombs, killed up to 750,000 Cambodians in their effort to destroy suspected North Vietnamese supply lines.
The Khmer Rouge guerrilla movement in 1970 was small. Their leader, Pol Pot, had been educated in France and was an admirer of Maoist (Chinese) communism; he was also suspicious of Vietnam's relations with Cambodia. The heavy American bombardment, and Lon Nol's collaboration with America, drove new recruits to the Khmer Rouge. So did Chinese backing and North Vietnamese training for them. By 1975 Pol Pot's force had grown to over 700,000 men. Lon Nol's army was kept busy trying to suppress not only Vietnamese communists on Cambodian territory but also Cambodia's own brand of communists, the Khmer Rouge.....
In 1978 Vietnam invaded Kampuchea and overthrew the Khmer Rouge. The guerrillas were driven into the western jungles and beyond to Thailand. Vietnam (now a communist republic forging links with the Soviet Union) set up a puppet government composed mainly of recent defectors from the Khmer Rouge. This new socialist government was comparatively benign, but found it hard to organise the necessary reconstruction programme: Pol Pot's policies had ruined the economy, there wasn't much foreign aid; all the competent professionals, engineers, technicians and planners had been killed.
The Khmer Rouge in retreat had some help from American relief agencies - 20,000 to 40,000 guerrillas who reached Thailand received food aid -and the West also ensured that the Khmer Rouge (rather than the Vietnam-backed communist government) held on to Cambodia's seat in the United Nations: the Cold War continued to dictate what allegiances and priorities were made.
The Khmer Rouge went on fighting the Vietnam-backed government. Throughout the 1980s the Khmer Rouge forces were covertly backed by America and the UK (who trained them in the use of landmines) because of their united hostility to communist Vietnam. The West's fuelling of the Khmer Rouge held up Cambodia's recovery for a decade.
Wanna bet Nixon, Ford, Reagan and Thatcher aren't three of the bastards mentioned in 'the red list'?
|
| 50 | Tree
ID: 61411921
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 20:04
|
One of my past computers had such a rigorous compilation of atrocities in it's favorites. I'll have to research it once again.
no one has more excuses than you. is that something in the tin foil hat manifesto? that you have an endless supply of excuses...
|
| 51 | Perm Dude
ID: 193231017
Mon, Apr 13, 2009, 20:34
|
I recall taking some hits from Baldwin for daring to mention that Vietnam was the one that finally ended the killing fields. Get ready for some flak, PV, along with some asides at "60's liberals" who took the guns out of the hands of the righteous.
|
| 52 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 01:44
|
Maybe Shepard Fairey can make you up a poster of Ho Chi Min storming Cambodia.
You can hang it next to your Shepard Fairey of Obama leading the activist mob storming Philadelphia and burning the constitution.
|
| 53 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 02:00
|
heh.
no one burned the constitution more than your boy, GW.
|
| 54 | Boxman
ID: 571114225
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 06:25
|
How was GW Boldwin's "boy"? I don't remember Boldwin being very flattering towards Bush. I'm sure you'll be able to cite various posts from Boldwin asserting that since you made the claim.
|
| 55 | nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 05047110
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 06:27
|
no one burned the constitution more than your boy, GW.
So true that but Baldwin won't acknowledge because W is a Republican and professed Bible thumper.
|
| 56 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 07:56
|
There hasn't been anyone in office since Reagan who believed in the constitution.
|
| 57 | Baldwin
ID: 132854
Wed, Apr 15, 2009, 10:22
|
You aren't going to know where I've gone, *nudge nudge, wink wink*.
|
| 58 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 16:15
|
One easy way to distinguish between Satan's phony idea of utopia and God's Kingdom is that Satan's seeks to make the world safe for perversion and evil and outlaw any mention of God's laws and standards.
They can and possibly will outlaw the preaching of true religion here, just as they have already in Canada and Brazil.
And the majority of posters here will applaud.
This is very very close to the true definition of Armageddon which is when the leaders of the world take a united stand in oppostion to the true God.
Which is very shortly followed by the Great Day of Jehovah, when he delivers his people just as he did in Moses' day.
|
| 59 | Mith
Dude
ID: 01629107
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 16:31
|
Were I detatched and hysterical enough to believe with every fiber of my body, that Obama or some Alinsky believing political heir of his will [torture] me, I guess hate crime legislation is as apt a place as any to pick as the tool that will one day lead to my persecution.
I was hoping for some feedback to a question in the teabag thread.
|
| 60 | C.SuperFreak
ID: 15242129
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 17:12
|
"They can and possibly will outlaw the preaching of true religion here, just as they have already in Canada..."
what do you mean? Can you elaborate on this statement.
|
| 61 | Perm Dude
ID: 4032209
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 17:45
|
He's referring to some countries with hate crime legislation on the books.
|
| 62 | DWetzel at work
ID: 49962710
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 17:58
|
Nothing about outlawing the preaching of false religions, of course! ;)
|
| 63 | Razor
ID: 41323216
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 22:27
|
That article was straight out the National Enquirer.
|
| 64 | Tree
ID: 41371322
Tue, Apr 21, 2009, 23:09
|
stop insulting the Enquirer that way.
|
| 65 | Baldwin
ID: 553441513
Wed, Apr 22, 2009, 13:08
|
Can you elaborate on this statement.
You can currently be sued into poverty or worse in Canada and elsewhere, soon everywhere most likely, for quoting what the Bible says about homosexuality.
If you cannot explain or even quote the Bible to your congregation, your religion has effectively been outlawed and you have to go underground or practice your religion in prison to survive as a religious people.
|
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com |
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|