Of such differences of opinion are great debates and less great political campaigns made. It is important to our way of life that gentlefolk of conviction be able to express their ideas in the arena of public opinion. Debates and honest reporting by an unbiased media assures us of an informed electorate able to pick the perfect candidate for a particular office. We all know how this has worked. Not at all well, for any number of reasons.
Now three important liberal voices in the Democrat party have a solution to the public dissonance that we have all been subject to. Andrew Cuomo, Bill de Blasio, and Chuck Schumer have decided that it would be best if the first amendment were rescinded with regard to conservative speech. Not only that, but that all conservatives should get out of their state, New York. Henceforth, only liberals allowed. Imagine, if you will, a world run by these three fine gentlemen.
Now their ideas may dazzle the elite Illuminati who make up the ranks of the most "progressive" New Yorkers, but I don't think they are charming the four wheel drive and deer rifle crowd of northern New York State. I am sure that they are elated that their own elected governor would like half of the population to just go elsewhere.
As I have written before, liberals look at the bill of rights a tad differently. Liberal speech is free speech. Conservative speech is knuckle dragging neanderthal grunts and has no place in society. As far as the second amendment is concerned, no guns for civilians except for those that guard rich liberals and their enclaves.
The thing that I find most personally troubling about liberal-speak is the uncivil tone. They have no respect for anyone but themselves. I go on Facebook on occasion to keep in contact with family that is not close by. Yesterday I came across a communication between a liberal cousin and her liberal friend. Referring to some Republican politicians, the sentiment was, "they should have been drowned at birth". Thoughts like this are not rare in the liberal lexicon.
It was not too many years ago when politicians could work together and public debate was polite. The world has changed a great deal since then. Maybe not for the better.
Gee, here's a thought :
ReplyDeleteI wish Schumer's so called Dispose Law was in effect in 2008 when he announced that IndyMac Bank was in dire financial straits, which caused a "clear and present danger" (the Supreme Court rationale for outlawing hate or similar speech under the 1st Amendment). The "danger" which ensued was a run on the bank for 1.3 BILLION dollars (the first danger) which resulted in the start of the Great Recession (the second danger, that we are still feeling).
His reponse?? "I was only the messenger" even though he (with the balance of a new Democrat Congress) voted against then-Pres. Bush's draft legislation to control Fanie Mae and Freddie Mac--where Schumer pushed the President AND Congress for these two corp. to take on even MORE risks to expand home ownership when mortgage-holders---via loose underwriting--were unqualfied to do so...(the third danger = the housing bubble).
(By the way, Chuck U., Congress controls the purse strings, not the President...go back to high school and relearn the process. Code ID-10-iT).
Finally, by curtailing campaign finance via the 1st Amendment argument, results in more ad-lib, 30-sec. PSA's rather than the public obtaining a lengthier discussion and deliberation of all arguments for all issues that can cost substantial sums of money--which we "peons" can't afford. Corporations and business interests are taxpayers too, or are they supposed to be left out of any discussion, as in Obamacare?? (the fourth danger, second housing bubble coming in 2020, along with the fifth danger, the "single payer" health laws in 2016).
I get my news from divergent sources....curtailing their funding hurts my opinions and ultimately, my vote.
Chuck U.--how can we miss you if you won't leave...? (psst, take Harry Reid and Hitlery with you)...the sound of the phone not ringing is me calling.
Unbelievable!!
ONLY GOD FORGIVES SINS
ReplyDeleteContrary to what men believe, only God can forgive the sins that have been committed against Him. Joseph Smith nor Brigham Young can forgive sins. Catholic priests cannot forgive sins. Lutheran ministers cannot forgive sins. There are no men dead or alive who can forgive the sins that men commit against God.
ONLY GOD FORGIVES SINS!
Isaiah 43:25 "I, even I, am the one who wipes out your transgressions for My own sake, And I will not remember your sins.
ONLY GOD FORGIVES SINS!
Micah 7:18 Who is a God like You, who pardons iniquity...
Only God pardons iniquity. Joesph Smith, Brigham Young, Catholic priests, nor Lutheran ministers have the authority to pardon iniquity.
Daniel 9:98 To the Lord our God belong compassion and forgiveness, for we have rebelled against Him;
Mankind has rebelled against God and He alone can grant forgiveness.
THE SCRIBES UNDERSTOOD ONLY GOD COULD FORGIVE SINS!
Mark 2:6-11..the scribes...7...He is blaspheming; who can forgive sins but God alone? ....10 But so that you may know that the Son of Man has the authority on earth to forgive sins"---He said to the paralytic, 11 "I say to you, get up, pick up your pallet and go home."
The problem with scribes was they did not realize that Jesus was God in the flesh. Joesph Smith, Brigham Young, Catholic priests, Lutheran ministers, nor any other men, are or were, God in the flesh.
DID JESUS GRANT THE APOSTLES THE AUTHORITY TO FORGIVE SINS? NO HE DID NOT.
Acts 8:18-22 ....20 But Peter said to him....22 Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you.
The apostle Peter did not grant forgiveness to Simon, he told Simon to pray to God for forgiveness. Note, Simon was already a Christian.
THE PROOF TEXT.
John 20:19-23 ....23 If you forgive the sins of any, their sins have been forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they have been retained."
Jesus was not giving Peter and the rest of the apostles the power to grant forgiveness of sins to men on an individual bases, Jesus was not ordaining them as priests with that power. Jesus was giving Peter and the apostles the authority to proclaim the terms for forgiveness of sins. Peter and the apostles did just that on the day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:22-41...36 Therefore let the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ---this Jesus whom you crucified. 37...Peter and the rest of the apostles....38 Peter said to them , "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.)
Peter and the apostles did not forgive sins on the Day of Pentecost nor on any subsequent day. They declare God's terms for pardon.
FAITH: John 3:16
REPENTANCE: Acts 2:38
CONFESSION: Romans 10:9-10
WATER BAPTISM: Acts 2:38
Christians are not asked to confess to Joesph Smith, Brigham Young, Catholic priests, Lutheran ministers, nor any other men, in order to have their sins against God forgiven!
Christians are to confess their sins to God in order to receive forgiveness. (1 John1:5-9 ....God is light... 9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and cleanse us from unrighteousness.)
1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator also between men, the man Christ Jesus,
The only priest standing between men and God is the high priest, Jesus Christ.
NOTE: Confessing sins and asking God for forgiveness is only available to Christians. Non-Christians must have FAITH, REPENT, CONFESS JESUS AS LORD, BELIEVE IN HIS RESURRECTION AND BE BAPTIZED IN WATER IN ORDER TO THEIR SINS FORGIVEN.
ONLY GOD FORGIVES SINS!
( All Scripture quotes from: NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE)
YOU ARE INVITED TO FOLLOW MY BLOG. http://steve-finnell.blogspot.com
Steve, you obviously come from a very fundamentalist point of view. That is fine, but be aware that there is no proof that you are absolutely correct. Most people that sin, sin against their fellow man. I personally, believe in the priesthood of all believers. In other words, as long as I retain my faith, I am the equal to any priest or a person that claims a high religiosity. I believe so no man can deny me that belief. I can as a believer baptize and welcome one into the Christian Community. I can forgive sins if they are sins against man and not against God. May I suggest to you that anyone that claims to understand God is mistaken. That is a road that no man can travel, nor should they try. Do good where we can do good. Forgive what we can forgive. Live a life so that you will not fear death. A man can do no more.
DeleteWow..seriously??? .I didn't expect this on the topic of the First Amendment, but I feel that I need to reply., as a both Catholic and Christian.
DeleteFirst, sin is a transgression (ultimately or directly) against God and His stated commandments--not against his fellow man, although that is the passage whereby we eventually sin against God.. It is also the failure of what was avoided or turned away that might have done good for oneself and others--what might have been, had one accomplished a thing or idea in God's favor. Our physical (and mental) acts are always in question with God...
Second, Jesus came from Heaven as the Son of Man--as a man. Dying for our sins, and knowing full well none of us can ever be pure of spirit, He permitted the Apostles and their subsequent appointed authority ("as My Father has sent Me, so I send you") through the workings of the Holy Spirit to forgive (or not) the transgressions of other men ("whatever sins you forgive, they are forgiven. Whatever sins you don't forgive, they are not forgiven.").
If the blessed sacrament of Penance is made to feel not worthy and is thus discredited, then so, too, are the other sacraments of Baptism, Confirmation, Marriage, Eucharist, Last Rites, and Priesthood--each where a priest is personally involved....
To take that blessed capacity to perform away from a God-given right to the priest-- as God and Jesus' representative on earth--is to wholly discredit the Church and her teachings, as well as the priest's ability in ALL other sacraments.
While a man can personally forgive (in his mind) someone else their trasngressions against God and Jesus' teachings, nonetheless those sins are not really forgiven unless a priest (as Jesus' representative) does so in confession.
While we are alive as men, we must adhere to God's Word. At death, we will be asked on how we brought ourselves and others to Judgment in saving souls--including our own. Failure as a man alive to account for our sins in front of another through the blessed sacrament of Penance will mean that any (mortal or venial) sin stains our entry into Heaven. Period. There is no way around it....we either recognize God now--through His sacraments--or we don't, and thus face the ravages of Hell as God demands unto Himself.
I am not equal to a priest, as I am not authorized to be so by the Church, as I have not been blessed with the Sacrament of Holy Orders. While no priest is God or Jesus Incarnate...the priest DOES have those capacities that Jesus gave them through Himself and the Holy Spirit--Who directs us all.
Based on the above, I can no longer subscribe to this blog or that of Steve above.
Return to your first love - God.
Regrettably, another group that wish that conservatives would just disappear are the leadership of the Republican party, who are anything but conservative.
ReplyDelete