Comments on: ‘Gays’ Mock Jesus with Last Supper Take-Off http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/ The Blog of Family Research Council Fri, 03 Feb 2012 06:28:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Richard http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-658 Richard Thu, 25 Oct 2007 20:08:48 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-658 Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them? I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her? I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense. Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians? I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself? A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here? Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die? I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves? My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14) I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging. Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God’s Law. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.

I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord (Lev. 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev.24:10-16)
Couldn’t we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev.20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God’s word is eternal and unchanging.

]]> By: Suricou Raven http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-657 Suricou Raven Wed, 17 Oct 2007 17:22:44 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-657 The FRC is by far the worst organisation I have see for misrepresenting the effects of the hate-crimes legislation. In numerous occasions I have seen on this blog or read in their email news claims that it would threaten speech. The phrase 'silence Christians' seems to appear frequently. It is also common to see completly different non-american laws given as examples of what the hate-crimes act would do, even though there is no resemblence beyond the fact that they are related to homosexuality. The FRC has also refused to admit that the hate-crimes proposal does absolutly nothing for any group that has not already been done in law for racial or religious groups - a fact that seriously weakens their 'equal protection' argument. The FRC is by far the worst organisation I have see for misrepresenting the effects of the hate-crimes legislation. In numerous occasions I have seen on this blog or read in their email news claims that it would threaten speech. The phrase ‘silence Christians’ seems to appear frequently. It is also common to see completly different non-american laws given as examples of what the hate-crimes act would do, even though there is no resemblence beyond the fact that they are related to homosexuality.

The FRC has also refused to admit that the hate-crimes proposal does absolutly nothing for any group that has not already been done in law for racial or religious groups – a fact that seriously weakens their ‘equal protection’ argument.

]]> By: Suricou Raven http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-656 Suricou Raven Mon, 15 Oct 2007 13:36:30 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-656 Stevie: Nope. The poster has nothing to do with hate-crimes at all, and so - pass or fail - the those who made the poster remain free to mock christianity. Conversly, though, you remain equally free to mock them. So long as neither you nor they do anything violent, no crime takes place. Thats free speech: The first ammendment ensures that everyone has a right to say what they want, even if what they want to say is offensive, blastphemous, insulting or just stupid. Stevie: Nope. The poster has nothing to do with hate-crimes at all, and so – pass or fail – the those who made the poster remain free to mock christianity. Conversly, though, you remain equally free to mock them. So long as neither you nor they do anything violent, no crime takes place.

Thats free speech: The first ammendment ensures that everyone has a right to say what they want, even if what they want to say is offensive, blastphemous, insulting or just stupid.

]]> By: DW http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-655 DW Sat, 13 Oct 2007 06:10:25 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-655 As to the poster of course it is offensive. I expect non-Christians to act like non-Christians. I do have a problem when Christians act like non-Christians. By this I am talking about all the claims that these bills will limit speech or criminalize speech. Has anyone actually read these bills? There is nothing about speech in these bills except this from HR1152: SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION. Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution. Even if it did not have this clause, no bill is going to prevent us from having free speech in this country. At least 24 states have hate crime laws on the books now that include orientation. I have not seen it hurt anyone's free speech except when people are being disruptive. DW As to the poster of course it is offensive. I expect non-Christians to act like non-Christians. I do have a problem when Christians act like non-Christians. By this I am talking about all the claims that these bills will limit speech or criminalize speech. Has anyone actually read these bills? There is nothing about speech in these bills except this from HR1152:

SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.
Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any activities protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses of, the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Even if it did not have this clause, no bill is going to prevent us from having free speech in this country. At least 24 states have hate crime laws on the books now that include orientation. I have not seen it hurt anyone’s free speech except when people are being disruptive.

DW

]]> By: Stevie http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-654 Stevie Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:54:32 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-654 Seems to me like the hate crimes legislation would protect Christians like me from being subject to a poster of this nature. To be honest, I would be careful not to try to lump all gays into this category of trying to mock the Last Supper portrait as Tony tries to do with the headline. It is probably the work of a very small number of twisted people who have a lousy taste in humor. But, what has caused these two or three people who made the poster to be so revengeful and upset? Think about that... And why not show us the actual poster? Until you do, I am a little suspect at the motives. Seems to me like the hate crimes legislation would protect Christians like me from being subject to a poster of this nature. To be honest, I would be careful not to try to lump all gays into this category of trying to mock the Last Supper portrait as Tony tries to do with the headline. It is probably the work of a very small number of twisted people who have a lousy taste in humor.

But, what has caused these two or three people who made the poster to be so revengeful and upset? Think about that… And why not show us the actual poster? Until you do, I am a little suspect at the motives.

]]> By: Patrick http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-653 Patrick Wed, 10 Oct 2007 02:53:20 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-653 No doubt when Leonardo presented his original work many Christians conservatives claimed it was hateful and blaphemous because all the men in the picture wore dresses. But please, let me fully welcome FRC to the Cult of Victimization. No doubt when Leonardo presented his original work many Christians conservatives claimed it was hateful and blaphemous because all the men in the picture wore dresses.

But please, let me fully welcome FRC to the Cult of Victimization.

]]> By: Scott Markowsky http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-652 Scott Markowsky Sun, 07 Oct 2007 22:25:14 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-652 Give it up...You religous conservatives are some of the most hateful people in the world and always have been. First women were not equal, then blacks or any other ethnic group were not people now its gays who are sub-human. Stop hating people...and following a book that was written hundreds of years after any of the stories took place...think maybe there will be some errors, exaggerations, mis-quotes...probably not hey. Give it up…You religous conservatives are some of the most hateful people in the world and always have been. First women were not equal, then blacks or any other ethnic group were not people now its gays who are sub-human. Stop hating people…and following a book that was written hundreds of years after any of the stories took place…think maybe there will be some errors, exaggerations, mis-quotes…probably not hey.

]]> By: John http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-651 John Sun, 07 Oct 2007 22:09:42 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-651 Alas, homosexuals will never learn, I fear. Something must be done! Alas, homosexuals will never learn, I fear.

Something must be done!

]]> By: BRIAN KRETZER http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-650 BRIAN KRETZER Fri, 05 Oct 2007 23:03:05 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-650 IT DOESNT STOP WITH THE LAST SUPPER. THIS IS GAY HATE SPEECH..... <a href="http://flickr.com/photos/cstrasse/1466988334/" rel="nofollow">http://flickr.com/photos/cstrasse/1466988334/</a> IT DOESNT STOP WITH THE LAST SUPPER. THIS IS GAY HATE SPEECH…..

http://flickr.com/photos/cstrasse/1466988334/

]]> By: Suricou Raven http://www.frcblog.com/2007/09/gays-mock-jesus-with-last-supper-take-off/comment-page-1/#comment-649 Suricou Raven Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:42:00 +0000 http://new.frcblog.agathongroup.com/?p=345#comment-649 No, hate-crime is a very specific legal term: It only applies to acts of violence in which the motivation is hate driven by a protected characteristic of the victim. Not a hate crime: Insulting Christians. Not a hate crime: Attacking a christian to mug him. Hate crime: Attacking a christian *because* he is a christian, or because he holds a particular religious view. The determination of motive is left to the courts. I cant remember all the characteristics protected. It includes religion, race, national origin and gender, at least. If Bush's veto of the hate-crimes law is somehow overridden (Slim chance, but just about possible), then it will also include sexual orientation. No, hate-crime is a very specific legal term: It only applies to acts of violence in which the motivation is hate driven by a protected characteristic of the victim.

Not a hate crime: Insulting Christians.
Not a hate crime: Attacking a christian to mug him.
Hate crime: Attacking a christian *because* he is a christian, or because he holds a particular religious view.

The determination of motive is left to the courts.

I cant remember all the characteristics protected. It includes religion, race, national origin and gender, at least. If Bush’s veto of the hate-crimes law is somehow overridden (Slim chance, but just about possible), then it will also include sexual orientation.

]]>