[The Urban Sombrero]

Lord help us. There is a good reason that the salvation walk is referred to as the 'straight and narrow.' Matthew 7:14 (KJV)
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
Most go in at the wide gate.

I explained that Rom 1:25 talks about men choosing the lie over the truth. There are only two possibilities for mankind. He is offspring of only two origins, God the Father through the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ, or Satan the father of lies.

John 8:44 (KJV)
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.

I cannot say which you are, I don't know you.


The irony of your lack of understanding is incredible. You would merrily use the power of the US Constitution to make right certain moral issues of your own identification. But woe unto him who might offer to use the wisdom of the ages in discerning the intent of the founders who oft made reference to God within the founding documents. My argument would be that the US Constitution would not dare to interlope on God's authority.

You want to use the law to force white Christians into submission before liberalism. I don't know any easy way to break this to you but, most of us red neck white boys are not about to just lay down and let the La-La's redefine every facet of human life for us.

At one point in all this you actually tried to say that Rev 18 prophesizes the ' field being flipped' in favor of anybody who isn't white. Where that leaves you is anybody's guess, but now you're trying to say I have somehow tied salvation and originalism together. Both of us know better than that.

Now, if civil authority tried to force Christian churches to admit homosexuals as members, I would say that violates freedom of conscience. But, it seems to me, that the civil authority said equal protection extended to same sex couples, and you are on BGR vehemently voicing your displeasure. I am assuming the church you attend will be extending no memberships to gay couples, nor will you be forced to.
I do not believe the civil authority expressed as judicial branch was doing handstands upon the ruling. To them, it was saying "we" extended to the right of same sex couples to have the license of the state sanctioning their bond. To say that the civil authority recognizes a right is not the same as a bunch of the men of Sodom trying to beat down a door to rape Lot's angelic visitors.