On 6/28/13 1:26 AM, Tim wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 8:48:28 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 6/27/13 8:53 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:

On 6/27/2013 6:29 PM, Tim wrote:

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 4:05:42 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:





What we will get is activists going from Church to Church suing those



who will not marry them. The long term is to drive the Churches from



their business... They just do it so much better than the Govt, the

left



hates that.







More absurdities.



Not really, Harry.



I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's

beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time.

He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man

and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the

church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must

perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide.

OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged

in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly

forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.



Seriously.





The folks on the other side of that know what they are after, they are

just not honest enough to face it up front...





Face what...that you shouldn't be discriminating against gays? If you

work for a company and it sets a policy that applies to the company and

is legal and you don't like the policy, your choices are simple...either

go along or get out. Is there something about being an employee of a

church that allows you to thumb your nose at church policy?

Harry, call it what you want, but this is a matter of religious freedom being possibly jeopardized by being forced into compliance.


Is there religious freedom involved when the folks who run the church
tell the pastor what to do?

On 6/28/2013 1:26 AM, Tim wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 8:48:28 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 6/27/13 8:53 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:

On 6/27/2013 6:29 PM, Tim wrote:

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 4:05:42 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:





What we will get is activists going from Church to Church suing those



who will not marry them. The long term is to drive the Churches from



their business... They just do it so much better than the Govt, the

left



hates that.







More absurdities.



Not really, Harry.



I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's

beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time.

He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man

and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the

church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must

perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide.

OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged

in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly

forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.



Seriously.





The folks on the other side of that know what they are after, they are

just not honest enough to face it up front...





Face what...that you shouldn't be discriminating against gays? If you

work for a company and it sets a policy that applies to the company and

is legal and you don't like the policy, your choices are simple...either

go along or get out. Is there something about being an employee of a

church that allows you to thumb your nose at church policy?

Harry, call it what you want, but this is a matter of religious freedom being possibly jeopardized by being forced into compliance.


Let's not go stirring up the homosexual hornets nest now, Tim. Let them
do "their own thing".

In article ,
says...

On 6/27/2013 4:49 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:44:35 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Now that same-sex marriage is legal, I wonder how many male ultra
conservatives are worried their boyfriends will give them ultimatums.

Hey maybe we will get that rule that you can marry one man and one
woman out of this,


What we will get is activists going from Church to Church suing those
who will not marry them. The long term is to drive the Churches from
their business... They just do it so much better than the Govt, the left
hates that.

What do churches do "so much better"?

In article ,
says...

On 6/27/2013 6:29 PM, Tim wrote:
On Thursday, June 27, 2013 4:05:42 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:


What we will get is activists going from Church to Church suing those

who will not marry them. The long term is to drive the Churches from

their business... They just do it so much better than the Govt, the left

hates that.



More absurdities.

Not really, Harry.

I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time. He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide. OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly
charged in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.

Seriously.


The folks on the other side of that know what they are after, they are
just not honest enough to face it up front...

Just what insanity are you talking about NOW?

In article ,
says...

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 8:48:28 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 6/27/13 8:53 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:

On 6/27/2013 6:29 PM, Tim wrote:

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 4:05:42 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:





What we will get is activists going from Church to Church suing those



who will not marry them. The long term is to drive the Churches from



their business... They just do it so much better than the Govt, the

left



hates that.







More absurdities.



Not really, Harry.



I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's

beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time.

He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man

and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the

church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must

perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide.

OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged

in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly

forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.



Seriously.





The folks on the other side of that know what they are after, they are

just not honest enough to face it up front...





Face what...that you shouldn't be discriminating against gays? If you

work for a company and it sets a policy that applies to the company and

is legal and you don't like the policy, your choices are simple...either

go along or get out. Is there something about being an employee of a

church that allows you to thumb your nose at church policy?

Harry, call it what you want, but this is a matter of religious freedom being possibly jeopardized by being forced into compliance.

There are all sorts of laws that people of all religions and beliefs
have to be in compliance of. Do you think we should do away with all of
them?

On 6/27/2013 3:29 PM, Tim wrote:

Not really, Harry.

I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time. He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide. OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.

Seriously.

Complaining that church policy is dictated from above? That's funny...


http://www.clergyproject.org/

In article , says...

On Thu, 27 Jun 2013 14:44:35 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

Now that same-sex marriage is legal, I wonder how many male ultra
conservatives are worried their boyfriends will give them ultimatums.

Hey maybe we will get that rule that you can marry one man and one
woman out of this,

At first glance it could be good to be married to two women but, upon further reflection I
don't need two women with their own honey do lists for me to punch on a regular basis.

On Friday, June 28, 2013 11:12:43 AM UTC-5, thumper wrote:
On 6/27/2013 3:29 PM, Tim wrote:



Not really, Harry.



I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time. He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide. OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.



Seriously.



Complaining that church policy is dictated from above? That's funny...





http://www.clergyproject.org/

I really don't know where you got the notion that I was directing my comment in such a way, or how your link even applies to what I was speaking of, but I'm glad you posted it anyhow. Because I see a double standard in one of the articles:

From Minister To Atheist: A Story Of Losing Faith
Read full article
April 30, 2012
NPR - by Barbara Bradley Hagerty

"...Teresa MacBain has a secret, one she’s terrified to reveal. “I’m currently an active pastor and I’m also an atheist,” she says. “I live a double life. I feel pretty good on Monday, but by Thursday — when Sunday’s right around the corner — I start having stomachaches, headaches, just knowing that I got to stand up and say things that I no longer believe in and portray myself in a way that’s totally false.”

So, I take it that because Teresa MacBain preaches against her beliefs (or lack of) because she feels forced to in some way (...just knowing that I got to stand up and say things that I no longer believe in and portray myself in a way that’s totally false.”) that she is to be felt sorry for?

Yet threatening to ruin a pastors retirement and/or revoking his ordination to force him to marry homosexuals against his convictions is justifiable?

hmmm.

On Friday, June 28, 2013 7:29:44 AM UTC-5, wrote:


I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time. He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide. OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.



Seriously.



I have a friend who is a _______ at ____________ who's beliefs have

been steering towards _________ for some time. He doesn't believe in

_________ but stands on the core of _______. However, he is afraid

that if the deciding powers of the _______'s national, or state (or

even regional) _______says he must __________, then he feels he will

be forced to abide. OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could

be civilly charged in a discrimination suite(sic), maybe lose his

retirement and/or possibly forfeit his _______ license to _______.


Why all the 'fill-in-the-blanks?'

On Friday, June 28, 2013 5:00:01 AM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 6/28/13 1:26 AM, Tim wrote:

On Thursday, June 27, 2013 8:48:28 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:

On 6/27/13 8:53 PM, JustWaitAFrekinMinute wrote:



On 6/27/2013 6:29 PM, Tim wrote:



On Thursday, June 27, 2013 4:05:42 PM UTC-5, F.O.A.D. wrote:











What we will get is activists going from Church to Church suing those







who will not marry them. The long term is to drive the Churches from







their business... They just do it so much better than the Govt, the



left







hates that.















More absurdities.







Not really, Harry.







I have a friend who is a pastor of an old line denomination who's



beliefs have been steering towards social 'gay rights' for some time.



He doesn't believe in 'gay marriage' but stands on the core of 'man



and woman'. However, he is afraid that if the deciding powers of the



church's national, or state (or even regional) council says he must



perform same-sex marriages, then he feels he will be forced to abide.



OR, he feels that there is a chance that he could be civilly charged



in a discrimination suite, maybe lose his retirement and/or possibly



forfeit his ordination license to preach in that denomination.







Seriously.











The folks on the other side of that know what they are after, they are



just not honest enough to face it up front...











Face what...that you shouldn't be discriminating against gays? If you



work for a company and it sets a policy that applies to the company and



is legal and you don't like the policy, your choices are simple...either



go along or get out. Is there something about being an employee of a



church that allows you to thumb your nose at church policy?



Harry, call it what you want, but this is a matter of religious freedom being possibly jeopardized by being forced into compliance.





Is there religious freedom involved when the folks who run the church

tell the pastor what to do?

Harry, I really don't know how to rationally answer your question, but to say that if the denomination tells you to tow their line regardless of your convictions, then speaking for myself, I'd say say 'no'

And the reason I say that is because the denomination has changed it's stance moral stance on social issues within the past 20 or so years. In other words 'it ain't what it used to be"