Posted on 01/15/2014 3:47:52 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
ditor's note: Yolanda Young is the author of the memoir, "On Our Way To Beautiful", and the publisher and C.E.O. of Lawyers Of Color. Follow her on twitter @yolandayoungesq
(CNN) -- As "Duck Dynasty" star Phil Robertson returns from his brief "hiatus," he'll do so to the cheers of some surprising supporters — southern blacks. Robertson was suspended from the A&E hit show for calling homosexuality a sin and equating it to bestiality in a GQ profile. Receiving less attention were his comments that black people were happier before the civil rights movement.
Media have focused on two camps in the controversy. On one side are Robertson's predictable supporters, who include white evangelicals, southern Republican politicians and Fox News. On the opposing team are LBGT activists and progressives
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Obviously not a true statement.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
Arguably a true statement within the limited area of "they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" Argument is only logical within those limits.
You are splitting hairs in order to defend CNN.
“You are splitting hairs in order to defend CNN.”
I see it more as defending language.
“Argument is only logical within those limits.”
We are in agreement. Which is how the word ‘equal’ or ‘equivalency’ is being used, not excluded from anything where two things being compared aren’t identical in every way.
CNN just can't hide their bitterness at being pushed into irrelevance by a network who reports the facts as they are, and not what the Left wishes them to be.
OK. Murder = Securities Fraud. Some defense of the language. If I am ever in trouble, and need defense, please don’t bother.
“OK. Murder = Securities Fraud.”
I have not made nor defended that unqualified statement.
This one--or any copy of Scripture you pick up.
I tend to replace the word “sin” with “consequences”...as the word “sin” implies that the person you’re talking to already accepts God and his moral code. If you talk about consequences people can relate and don’t see it as a religious discussion. When people see the consequences of immoral behavior they’ll tend to agree with you. For non-believers, they don’t like to think of themselves as imperfect and don’t want to hear it. They’ll dismiss you for just using the word “sin”....but they can’t dismiss facts and their own experience when you point out consequences.
Your answer is nonsensical. Most assuredly elements of the Bible pre-date Christianity. That was not the question. The question is which CHRISTIAN religion predates Catholicism?
And they only followed Scripture.
Homosexuality “is a” sin.
Using the “is a” relationship. Sin is the superclass, and the other two are subclasses. The “is a” relationship does not equate the two subclasses.
“In knowledge representation, object-oriented programming and design, is-a or is_a or is a (subsumption) is a relationship where one class A is a subclass of another class B (and so B is a superclass of A). In other words, Type A is a subtype of type B when A’s speciï¬cation implies B’s speciï¬cation. That is, any object (or class) that satisï¬es A’s speciï¬cation also satisï¬es B’s speciï¬cation, because B’s speciï¬cation is weaker.[1]”
Exactly. I said that that part wasn’t true.
Why don't you respond to Fuzz and CMAC51? Is this another of your hit-and-run posts?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.