Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 33
Send Topic Print
Folau vs Yassmin (Read 30559 times)
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #105 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #106 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm
 
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #107 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:32pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


Would you like to have a go at answering the question?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Setanta
Gold Member
*****
Offline


\/ Peace man!

Posts: 15851
Northern NSW
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #108 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #109 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm
 
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79545
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #110 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:54pm
 
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - the gay mince, the hystrionic demands, the suicidal imperative, the safe space demands, the attacks on 'normals', the Pink Precincts - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Setanta
Gold Member
*****
Offline


\/ Peace man!

Posts: 15851
Northern NSW
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #111 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79545
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #112 - Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:59pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.



So 'members of the government' didn't actually sack her?  No more than... say... the Irish QANTAS poof had anything to do with sacking Folau?

Hmm - when someone's right to say something hasn't been abrogated, but they are criticised for saying it.... where is there any need to discuss abrogation of rights?

I can safely say that I disagree with what you said, and think it was silly stuff to say in public - how is that abrogating your right to say it or post it?  Not saying I disagree with everything you post above - just using this as an example...

Now - draw your pay and hit the road - you're sacked!  Grin
Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Grappler Truth Teller Feller
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 79545
Proud pre-1850's NO Voter
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #113 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 12:11am
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 9:45pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 8:32pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 7:25pm:
She wasn't fired. As I explained in the OP, what actually transpired was a perfect example of how free speech is supposed to work. No-one defended her freedom to say stupid poo because it was never denied her.


Come off it FD, you can't be serious.

Members of the government were calling for her head - over one little tweet. I'm talking about people who actually control funding and board appointements to the ABC, where she was working. We saw in the Guthrie blow-up how seriously the ABC takes such "suggestions" from government members (the board wanted Alberici sacked because they thought Turnbull didn't like her - and then sacked Guthrie (partly) because she didn't).

You can't seriously be suggesting there wasn't a real threat to her job - because she expressed her free speech. How is this anything other than a real and totally unacceptable attack on her free speech?

If Abetz and Joyce etc had simply said "she shouldn't have said that" but either stated specifically, or implied implicitly, that she had the *RIGHT* to say it, even as an ABC employee, then that would be "how free speech is supposed to work". But to come out and specifically say the ABC should sack her for what she said, is not how free speech should work. It is an egregious attack on it.


News Ltd had an entire campaign. Once she got death and rape threats and had eggs and spit thrown at her, they played the free speech no-one-has-the-right-to-not-be-offended card.

Still, fair's fair. FD has never had a problem with Lest we forget, just Islam is the most feminist religion.

Once she said that, well.

She's tinted.


Those are criminal acts - nothing to do with any sacking ..... and I trust the perpetrators were arrested and charge and punished if found guilty... to the fullest extent of the law...

As I said elsewhere several days ago - citing criminal acts to support a contention of some 'norm' is not valid... and criminal acts are ........ criminal acts pure and simple...

I'd hardly say the majority of Australians were onside with that kind of abuse.... and many such would have punched perps out ...

Sidenote:-  So it's all right to 'egg' Fraser Anning for an innocuous comment on the inevitability of certain acts in response to numerous acts of others - but it's NOT all right to 'egg' a public commentator who utters utter silliness in public with a straight face?

Where do we start and finish with 'egging'?

Before you leap to the fray and over a cliff - I am not discussing rape and death threats and throwing of spit.... those are outside the pale ... but the issue I'm discussing is 'egging' and its moral justification.

Should Fraser Anning be 'egged' without any recourse to justice, natural or otherwise, and receive no sympathy.... and should Yassmin be egged and receive full recourse to justice and natural sympathy?  Are there gradings of 'eggees' that we should consider?  Are they divided by some political divide?  Are some more poof than others and thus only half go to Hell?  Do we, as a nation, hang politicians of one kind but not the other - in which case how far are we removed, in reality, from some Third World Dictatorship that decrees what is right and what is wrong and who should be hung and who should not, along social or political lines?

Questions, questions... so many questions....

Back to top
 

“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”
― John Adams
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #114 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am
 
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?



Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Setanta
Gold Member
*****
Offline


\/ Peace man!

Posts: 15851
Northern NSW
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #115 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?



Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Mattyfisk
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 91855
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #116 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am
 
Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?



Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?



Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Setanta
Gold Member
*****
Offline


\/ Peace man!

Posts: 15851
Northern NSW
Gender: male
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #117 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:42am
 
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:40am:
Setanta wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:33am:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 6th, 2019 at 1:25am:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:58pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:43pm:
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:
Mattyfisk wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:30pm:
Now now, FD, in Auggie's homofascist zeal, he hasn't said the government is responsible for anything.

I believe you're saying the government should step in to legislate hommer-bashing as a matter of "religious" freedom.

Who's been reading the holy Quran, eh?

And what sound does a jellyfish make?

You haven't said.


I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account. I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap. I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same. Why are they offended by something they have no belief in? Why are the poofs so butt hurt? Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.


What's it got to do with poofs?

Wasn't FD cranky with Rugby Australia? Or the government for not telling them what to do with their employees? Or the Separation of Powers?

I forget now.

FD?


What's it got to do with FD? Poofs are the ones whining someone said they are going to hell unless they believe in some sky fairy and repent to him. Why would you get upset if a nutjob like Israel says that? Why are the poofs and the perpetually offended giving a toss? Really who gives a shyte what he says and he had more reasons to have me in hell that a bit of miam miam?



Rugby Australia, eh?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.


I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?



Oh, some of them probably have spoilt hommer kids they don't want to offend.

So typical of sporting and youth associations.


That's the best you can come up with? I ask again...

"I don't follow sport. RA has nothing to do with what I'm saying and asking you. So skip that and answer without RA or sponsors or Quantas. Why are poofs and their perpetually offended friends even giving a fuck?"


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #118 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 8:23am
 
polite_gandalf wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:05pm:
freediver wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 10:15pm:
Suppose Alan Joyce called for his sacking, but he was not sacked. Do you think people on here would care as much about Folau's freedom of speech and freedom of religion then?


Of course they would. Joyce is already under fire for the sacking.

Folau's actual sacking isn't what the culture warriors are getting their pants wet over - its that the "homofascists" as you call them dared to attack him for his religious views. Joyce stepping in would have just upped the ante, as he is an actual vested interest in this - and it would have (rightly) been interpreted by the culture warriors as RA being put under real and significant pressure to sack one of their players - given Qantas's financial influence over RA.

To say that liberal politicians - including senior cabinet ministers - calling directly for an ABC employee to be sacked is not a serious interference that causes real influence to the ABC management is disingenuous to the extreme. Especially with what we now know about the Alberici case. And simply retorting that neither Yassmin or Alberici were sacked in the end does not change the fact that it was an egregious attack on their freedom.


The only reason it is an issue is because Folau was actually sacked. Otherwise the vast majority would take the same view as the atheists, drunks, fornicators etc on Folau's list - who cares what they say?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Yadda
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 20901
A cat with a view
Re: Folau vs Yassmin
Reply #119 - Jul 6th, 2019 at 9:00am
 
Setanta wrote on Jul 5th, 2019 at 11:36pm:

I meet a few of the "going to hell" list, more if we take other shyte from the bible into account.

I haven't complained and have no wish to, as far as I'm concerned he can go to hell with his religious crap.

I have to wonder why the poofs couldn't do the same.

Why are they offended by something they have no belief in?

Why are the poofs so butt hurt?


Perhaps that could be a rhetorical Q.




It has got everything to do with 'GAY PRIDE' you see.




Setanta,

It is coz queers of all persuasions need 'SAFE SPACES' in which to be queers [of all persuasions].


Its sorta like snowflakes, ....i.e. snowflakes can't be subjected to intense scrutiny.

Why so ?

Coz, to closely scrutinise something, you need a strong light source,      100W at least.

And if you subject a snowflake to a strong light source, they will simply melt away!

Same with queers [of all persuasions].

They too, need 'SAFE SPACES' in which to exist.



Its about 'GAY PRIDE' you see.


Queers of all persuasions, are just SOOOO PROUD of being queers [of all persuasions],
that they fear that they may melt [too!] if they are subjected to any form    social    criticism or scrutiny.

Coz society, is the 'water' in which they swim.

And to be reminded of the existence of a
shhhh
, a bible, [by Israel Folau [such an unfortunate Christian name too, eh!] ] is simply intolerable!



But.....

'GAY PRIDE LIVES!!!!'

'We're queer! We're here!!!!     Get used to it. ....and don't mention Israel Folau or we'll all cry and assume fetal positions!!!!'



fetal = = of or relating to a fetus.     denoting a posture characteristic of a fetus, with the back curved forwards and the limbs folded in front of the body.


END OF SAFE SPACE !

END OF SAFE SPACE !

END OF SAFE SPACE !



WARNING; QUEERS, SHOULD READ NO FURTHER!!!

.....or, be sure to have a hanky close by, and be prepared to be emotionally compelled to assume the fetal position and to weep uncontrollably!



.




Romans 1:26
For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
27  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
28  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;


1 Corinthians 6:9
Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
10  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


Galatians 5:19
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20  Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21  Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.



Back to top
 

"....And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."
Luke 16:31
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 8 9 10 ... 33
Send Topic Print