Browse By

Should The U.S. Government Try To Control Use Of Social Media By Terrorists?

This week, U.S. Representative Ted Poe introduced H.R. 3654, legislation which “requires the Administration to outline and report to Congress on its own efforts and those in coordination with private companies to combat terrorist use of social media.”

Stopping terrorists from using social media – who could argue with that? Well, if federal government efforts to “combat” terrorist use of social media go forward, maybe no one will be able to.

“Terrorist use of social media” is not terrorism. It’s use of social media by terrorists. It’s speech.

If, on social media there is specific incitement to violence, or the creation of a conspiracy to commit violence, that’s a crime, and can be prosecuted. Accounts used for such criminal behavior can be shut down. There’s no problem with that.

However, that’s not all that Congressman Ted Poe is going after with H.R. 3654. Poe is trying to criminalize religious conversion to certain types of Islam that he doesn’t approve of. “Social media has given ISIS leaders in the Middle East the ability to reach and radicalize teenagers in Western basements—instantly and for free,” Poe complains. He worries about the spread of “the cancer of radical Islam” in America.

In America, though, we have something called the First Amendment. It states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

Ted Poe has made it clear that he wants to pass H.R. 3654 to use the power of the federal government to interfere with the free exercise of certain types of religion, which he calls “radical Islam”. He also wants to criminalize speech that seeks to “radicalize teenagers”.

It’s not a crime, however, to be radical. Violent radicalism is criminal, but only because it’s violent, not because it’s radical.

Representative Ted Poe is repeating mistakes of the Red Scare of the 20th century, which supposed that Communists had powerful techniques to instantly convert ordinary American teenagers into raving Marxists, using secret Russian “brainwashing” techniques. There was nothing of the sort actually going on. What was really happening is that some Americans decided for themselves that they agreed with Communist propaganda.

Likewise, today, no Islamic organization has developed the ability to instantly radicalize American teenagers, using radicalization rays or hypnotweets or anything of the sort, whether teenagers are in their basements or in another part of their homes. If an American teenager decides to join an organization known for its brutal violence, there are other problems going on with that teenager’s psychological development, family life, or community. Nobody becomes an instant terrorist just because they read a 144-character post on Twitter.

Ted Poe calls the Internet the “cyber-battlefield”, but in truth, the only thing that’s at all akin to warfare online is the sabotage of hackers. That’s not what Ted Poe is trying to address.

Violence and violent conspiracies should be opposed by the American government. Radicalism can be an ugly thing or a beautiful thing, depending on its content, but whatever it is, it isn’t the business of anyone in the federal government. Censorship of religion and of speech is unconstitutional, but it isn’t an effective tool for suppressing ideas anyway. When ideas are banned, they become more alluring to people who are sick and tired of the social establishment.

The best way to diminish the appeal of violent organizations is to encourage open discussions about their brutal acts. Giving them the allure of being banned from public discussion helps no one, and weakens the liberties we all enjoy. When one group of unpopular ideas can be banned, so can others, whether they are violent or not.

28 thoughts on “Should The U.S. Government Try To Control Use Of Social Media By Terrorists?”

  1. Dave says:

    Well spoken, Peregrin. Good point about family life and community, also about banishment of discussion becoming an alluring thing; forbidden fruit I call it.

  2. Quinton Underwood says:

    Basically Peregrin is right in what was said but the whole article is like a blanket of calmness in front of a
    world of tragedies. This will not change until Government changes, this will not change until the media changes and the media is the one area that is not going to change. The media thrives from bad news, bad actions, and bad people, with very little or any time given to what is right, virtuous, and wholesome issues
    for the betterment of the people. And this will not change until the government gets out of the family business and back into government business. With the degradation of morals (and there is no morals at all in this country now)if I had children in school they would never see the insides of a public school and if I could have anything to with it, they would never be in any part of the military.

    “I make a living by what I get, and I make a life by what I give”

  3. ella says:

    “Likewise, today, no Islamic organization has developed the ability to instantly radicalize American teenagers, using radicalization rays or hypnotweets or anything of the sort, whether teenagers are in their basements or in another part of their homes. If an American teenager decides to join an organization known for its brutal violence, there are other problems going on with that teenager’s psychological development, family life, or community. Nobody becomes an instant terrorist just because they read a 144-character post on Twitter.”

    Earlier in your post you refer to the “Red Scare”. The tenet you are using is instantaneous conversion in both cases. A rather erroneous point of view. The word ‘Communist’ was repeated in a non threatening manner for years, until the general population recognized it as no more a threat than the word spaghetti’. In fact, a person trying to explain that Communism is a political ideology entirely different from Democracy was considered an ‘alarmist’, someone to shun. Today the word is seldom used, it served its’ purpose. Now it is Progressive, or Socialist. Progressive is popular now, Socialist still causes some ripples of unease. It was a gentle take over from Capitalism, not quite totally successful, so you would not be afraid of being killed or tortured or shot on the street because of ‘Communism’ today.

    ‘Radical Islam’ is different, the media carries the stories of slaughter. Stories that speak of people who are like Americans, who are Christians, who live in towns in their own homes and go to work everyday – or did. Now they are dead because they would not recant the manner in which they worship God. Their towns are in smoldering ruins, only terrified survivors who ran fast enough, stray back and wonder that this was allowed in this day and time. And Americans who have been reached via the modern means of communication that goes everywhere, are coming to help kill them and take their homes away from them. Oh, it may take a few months to talk them into it, but they are young and excitement lures them away from their comfortable homes. Some are at a troubled age or are being, in their minds, mistreated by family or peers. Some are just answering a call that suits their personalities. There are Americans who are fighting against ISIS too.

    HR 3654 does not even have text online yet, not even a summary. Does it say anything that would save lives around the world, and maybe in the United States as well. Violence, for whatever reason, it becoming accepted as normal in the USA now? How many college students have been gunned down in the past 10 years? How many civilians that are not ever mentioned other than in local media? How many officers that are not mentioned in national media? How many students in the lower grades have come to live in fear because of the shootings and killings in schools in other towns? America is becoming more violent rapidly, but it took years for it to get this way.

    1. Jim Cook says:

      America is NOT becoming more violent. It is far LESS violent than in the past, actually. What has soared is the mass media fascination with violence. The scare is all about how people perceive the world, not about the world as it actually is.

  4. ella says:

    The way I wrote that may have made it seem it was American towns, not Iraqi, that I am referring to. That American young people are being drawn to in an exotic sort of way. The ‘games’ they have grown up playing, to me, have encouraged a violent mindset. The repetitious contest to ‘beat’ a violent ‘game’ created a memory base to work with.

    Violence, according to some, is escalating in at least some American cities, over a year ago.

    Currently, people in America that have died since January 1, 2015 from: Mass shooting 43; Domestic violence 1102; Murder by gun 8674; Homicide 12,678; Suicide 29,825.

    Although suicide is not considered a violent crime in the same way as murder, it is in that it is self inflicted murder and has some drastic underlying cause.

    1. Jim Cook says:


      To look at trends, you need more than one point in time. In general for the country, we are at noticeable lows. For any particular city, you could Visit to review more than 25 years of crime trends for Baltimore, Washington, Milwaukee, St. Louis and New Orleans, the five cities referred to in the first paragraph of that article.

      Actually, I’ll do that for you myself and post the results in a new article this morning. I’ll post a link to the new article when I’m done.

      Here it is:

  5. Leroy says:

    If one notes activities in certain cities, one does see specific rises in violent crimes over a short-term cycle.

    Over the last couple of months, Cleveland (OH) for example, has been experiencing a sharp rise in gun violence. Most has been drive-by shootings (and appear gang territory related) and have NOTHING to do with the “radical Islamics”. Even this increase is only noted as compared to the last few years. Twenty years ago, thirty years ago, forty years ago were much more violent.

    As a retired (30 year) police officer, I can assure you that the 1970s and 1980s were specifically much more violent than today… to include especially gun violence (and still by far the years where many more police officers were killed / assaulted each year than today).

    As a logical human, I can access annual. FBI Crime Report statistics which show me the same thing. The time period where we had minimal Muslim presence in this country had MORE violent crime than today.

    The Law Enforcement community has dealt with severely violent organizations over these past 40-50 years. The Italian / Sicilian (Catholic) mafia. Drug cartels (Jamaican, Columbian, Mexican, etcetera – none Islamic). Street gangs which became national in scope (think Bloods, Crips, Vice Lords, etcetera – all non Islamic). Outlaw motorcycle gangs which went national to international (Hell’s Angels, Outlaws, Banditos, etcetera – none Islamic). International ethnic mafias (Russian, Bulgarian, etcetera – only one, Albanian, that is Islamic related and well down the “problem list”). Black nationalist groups (primarily of late 1960s and through the 1970s – and considerably small groups – and only two of which were home grown American native Afro-American Islamics). Anti government white nationalist oriented “militia groups” (in the late 1980s and through the 1990s, a MAJOR law enforcement concern… yet basically 100% white and 100% ultra fundamentalist Protestant).

    As to these mass shootings, the regular gun violence in a country of 320 (plus) MILLION people dwarfs that specific small slice of violent crime / gun violence in this country.

    And I don’t know for sure as I didn’t read the NYT article cited by “Ella” in her response, but I would strongly believe that the article was in regard to violent crime increases (in a few select cities) in general…. not by strictly “radical Islamics”. In fact, the media today – with its extensive and intensive presence – is (IMO) a part of WHY people today perceive that violent crime is highly increased. “Local” coverage stations (and Internet sites) now have a much, much larger geographical area than they did 20+ years ago. A local Cleveland TV station covered Cleveland and the immediate inner suburban metro area and reported violent crimes from and into that smaller area. Today it covers NE and North Central Ohio from Sandusky to Ashtabula and south to Akron, Canton, Mansfield, etcetera… and covers violent crimes in that whole area and reports them to that whole area.

    The other problem is (IMO) that of the “Christian” Right pushing an agenda to attach a “radical Islamic” tag to as many acts of violence as possible. In truth, major acts of violence (the example given of college / school shootings specifically) are very minimally committed by Muslims. Most are disgruntled, mental-problem white males who are non Islamic.

    (I would note in watching TV reports of the Oregon college shooting that the perpetrator was a lone white male – with no indicators of a radical Islamic involvement. I note that MOST media reports include comments from ONE – the same – student, not a victim or direct witness, who claims that the shooter was asking victims to stand up and asking them what their religion was and then shooting them if they said that they were Christian – which, even if true, doesn’t automatically mean that the shooter was Islamic, or Hindu or Jewish or ANY religion as he could have been atheist. The student (if the full tape is shown – which isn’t always the case – then ends with “from what I’ve been told”!!! I have tracked that comment back to only ONE other person: the – devout “Christian” grandmother of one of the victims who said that this was what her granddaughter victim survivor told her in a post shooting telephone call. Until I hear repeated corroborations of that shooter statement by multiple shooting survivors and DIRECT witnesses, I personally am going to assume that this is NOT true, but simply more rightwing claims, whether substantiated or not, of “Christian persecution”.)

  6. ella says:

    Peregrin Wood:

    There is room here for developing ideas, I hope.
    The population of Muslims in the United States has been expanding at a rapid rate from 1980’s forward.

    […]”Just how is the Muslim population growing? The growth rate of Islam in Western nations (including the US and Canada) primarily comes through: a high Muslim birth rate and immigration (e.g., Muslims moving to the United States), not from converts (non-Muslims becoming Muslims). As we shall soon note in regard to converts, however, two groups are vulnerable to Muslim evangelism.”
    “There are several main reasons why this is so. First, for the past 50 years the United States government (unlike some countries) has not included questions about religious affiliation in its census.22 Dr. James Dretke, executive director of the Zwemer Institute, states that a second factor “is the fact that Muslims do not join mosques as Christians join churches, so it is impossible to count them from membership rolls. […]”

    The following, and above, was long before the 2015 influx of immigrant refugees into the greater European Union. Imagine the population increases now. This of course is not addressing violent crimes, but a different method of ‘evangelism’. Admittedly the violence is still in the Middle East at present. The Pacific/Asian region has been populated and is increasing now. There is a pattern.

    “According to most reports, Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world.15 For example, in Europe, according to United Nations statistics, between 1989 and 1998 the Islamic population grew by more than 100 percent (to about 14 million or 2 percent of the population).16 At the current rate of growth it is estimated that Islam’s population by the year 2025 will be 1.9 billion (about 24 percent of the total European population).17”

    Actually the estimates are now about 1.65 billion Muslims world wide. It all began in about 610 AD, the man Muhammad considered himself the last of God’s prophet’s: “This new faith incorporated aspects of Judaism and Christianity. It respected the holy books of these religions and its great leaders and prophets — Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and others. Muhammad called Abraham “Khalil” (“God’s friend”) and identified him as Islam’s ancient patriarch. Islam traces its heritage through Abraham’s son Ishmael.”

    It is easy to see why Christians and others find conversion tempting with no so much coercion, doesn’t it? A short Tweet?

    More later.

  7. Leroy says:

    As partially from another post comment:

    And as to Muslim populations, you do the same thing. After complaining about Muslim populations soaring in this country, you then jump statistically to Europe (most Muslims were inserted into Europe over decades as these immigrants were Europe’s form of MIGRANT WORKERS (who did the very manual, low paying jobs that Europeans didn’t want to do). So citing Europe’s Muslim population (and trying to make an American “some day” comparison) is totally unfair.

    How many immigrant Hispanics are in the United States?

    How many Hispanic immigrants are in the United States (and PLEASE… don’t quote Spain’s population, the population of Spain is European Spanish, and NOT Hispanic)?


    Muslims are (to a very, very strong degree) Europe’s Hispanic lower class workers (as immigrant Hispanics are likewise, to a strong degree, our Muslim “guest workers” – as they used to be referred to in then West Germany).

    BTW, in the United States, 17.1% of the population is Hispanic or Latino (mostly by far citizens or legal immigrants), 13.2% are African-American.

    What percentage are (regardless of Race or ethnicity) Muslim – of any type?

    15%? 10% 5%

    How about LESS THAN ONE PERCENT!!!!

    That is 0.6% or 6/10th of 1%!!!

    There are more Buddhists in this country than there are Muslims (0.7%).

    There are almost as many Hindus in this country (0.4%) as there are Muslims (and Hindus, due most specifically to a drastically rising Sikh population, is the FASTEST growing compared to Muslims or Buddhists).

    Buddhists and Hindus together are almost twice the population as that of Muslims (1.1% versus 0.6%).

    And Jews (who MAY at one time been “Jehovah’s Chosen People – at least until they lost that designation, but in any case are NOT Christian) make up 1.7% of the American population! Almost three TIMES as many as are Muslim.

    So quote accurate figures and compare apples to apples (and not apples to oranges).

    Also… at least define Jihad as it applies to the Islam religion correctly.

    As per the recognized Islamic Supreme Council of America:

    You can blather on with more replies that “explain away” things in a most fictitious manner, but personally, I would rather you just said “thank you”, and went on your way (to partially quote “Colonel Jessup”).

  8. ella says:

    Leroy: “And Jews (who MAY at one time been “Jehovah’s Chosen People – at least until they lost that designation,(…)”

    I don’t think God has given any man the right to tell Him who He gives rights to. Judeo/Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu. He can claim who ever He wants and He has not abandoned His people. Unless of course you are His prophet and are telling us this is what He has told you.

    The current world population of Islam is estimated to be 1.8 Billion, that is a more recent count. Populations of Islamist’s within the US are difficult to be certain of due to those who do not claim that religion and they do not have membership roles in Mosques. Plus the US census does not require that a person give their religion.

    Many of the countries that are now Muslim predominantly, were of another religion first. But it does not take a plurality of Muslims for them to have enough influence on a society to make social changes.

    Even though the Islamic health law (in Sharia Law) call for certain foods to be eaten in certain ways, they are not alone in these laws. The same are taught in Torah, and Hindu’s also have these food laws, as do Christians. They have not been kept for a long time in the US, but now Islamist’s are making money on producing and selling these foods worldwide. Islam is not a local religion. It, like Christianity, are world wide, and Islam is overtaking Christianity in membership numbers.

    Jihad can be called for more than one reason. Just as the Jihad that now is claiming a new Caliphate in Iran. What justification did they need to slaughter Christian, Kurd, and anyone who would not instantly bow to Islam? In the US there are too many, too advanced fighting men to start anything like that, but is it necessary to?

    1. Leroy says:

      I will have to answer this in detail later as I have a lot going on currently… And every time I read this I laugh that much more.

      Just for starters, estimates of Muslims worldwide are highly accurate but U. S. figures are not because the U. S. Census can’t ask you your religion?

      (But apparently the “Rest Of The World Census Bureau” CAN ask that???)

      Actually while SOME countries DO ask that question (your religion) in their census, most do not. They are mostly estimates as determined by non census polls and surveys and in figures obtained from various religious groups and organizations (oh yeah… But there’s this big CONSPIRACY thing that the Muslims are doing where they are working hard to hide their “true numbers”… wow, talk about wingnuts!).

      And Jews are still the Chosen People of the Christian God (Jehovah… same guy)?


      That is really strange. I was taught as a youngster that to go to Heaven you had to be a “saved” Christian. That you had to accept Jesus Christ as the Son of God, as the Messiah, and accept him as your savior.

      Is that no longer true?

      Because you see, Jews do NOT accept any of that (Judaism, being Jew, is a religion, not some ethnic group… there are no Christian Jews – once they become Christian they are no longer Jews).

      Most do not believe that Jesus even existed (and that if he did, he was either a traveling semi-lunatic preacher – or a traitor to true Jewish beliefs). They do not accept Jesus as the “Son of God”, they do not accept him as the Messiah (in fact claims of him being the Messiah are sinful to Jews)… And they do not accept him as their “Savior”. That being the facts, a New who dropped over dead right this moment would then go to… Hell (according to Christian belief – not my beliefs as I am Deist). So let’s use some logic here (you may have to look up that word). All these Jews who have died since the time of Jesus (and who will die AS JEWS for however long) will be in Hell gnashing their teeth, screaming, and wailing in agony – and yet are God’s “Chosen People”???

      Your biggest problem is that you really are pretty clueless as to what you are talking about – and that you take your “news” and “facts” from ultra fundamentalist rightwing political and religious WINGNUT Internet sources.

      Oh boy… so much to respond to.

      Until I get back however, I would appreciate one thing….

      You say:

      “Even though the Islamic health law (in Sharia Law) call for certain foods to be eaten in certain ways, they are not alone in these laws. The same are taught in Torah, and Hindu’s also have these food laws, as do Christians. They have not been kept for a long time in the US…”

      Hmmm… could you find me WHERE in the Bible – as pertains to Christians, not Jews – where Christians have “food laws” that are to be taught and that require CHRISTIANS to eat certain foods in certain ways (and presumably also NOT eat certain foods). I have read the Bible (both the New Testament – which is the legitimate Christian part – and the Old Testament – the Hebrew Bible) probably a total of four times cover to cover (plus who knows how many times in looking up particular scripture)… and I just don’t seem to recall ANY such mandates of food laws to Christians.

      Please let me know the scriptures THAT APPLY TO CHRISTIANS as regard that “food law” claim.

      1. ella says:

        Read Deuteronomy.

        1. Larry says:

          I have (read Deuteronomy)… several times. And also Leviticus – which actually has MORE scriptures referring to “food laws” and “health laws” than does Deuteronomy. I’m surprised you didn’t know that.

          But then that’s ridiculous (that I would think that) because those are JUDAIC LAWS that applies to Jews… not Christians! Back then, that would have been strictly Hebrews – which is why Biblical historians refer to the Old Testament as “The Hebrew Bible”.

          There is Deuteronomy 14:2-23 (etcetera) for example which lists “Clean” and “Unclean” animals and cooking killing / cooking restrictions.

          More so Leviticus for example. Leviticus chapter 11 (in its entirety almost). Also Leviticus chapter 7 to some extent.

          Yes, these STILL apply to religious Jews.

          What is the Torah as referred to there?

          In general, in ancient Biblical times, the Law of Moses (also called Old Testament Law, Mosaic Law, or just The Law) regulated almost every aspect of Jewish life. The Ten Commandments and many other laws defined matters of morals, religious practice and government. It regulated the army, criminal justice, commerce, property rights, slavery, sexual relations, marriage and social interactions. It required circumcision for males, animal sacrifices, and strict Sabbath observance. It provided for the welfare of widows, orphans, the poor, foreigners and domestic animals. Ceremonial rules divided animals into “clean” and “unclean” categories. Clean animals could be eaten; unclean animals could not. The Law of Moses was given to the Israelites when they were still a band of ex-slaves struggling to survive. Many of the laws were specific for the worship system and agricultural life of ancient Israel.

          As to whether these Biblical Food laws refer to Christians, I suggest that YOU read:

          Mark 7:1-23
          Colossians 2:14 and 16-17 and 20-23
          Acts 10:11-16 (*)
          Acts 13:39
          Matthew 15:1-20

          (*) He (St. Peter) saw heaven opened and something like a large sheet being let down to earth by its four corners. It contained all kinds of four-footed animals, as well as reptiles of the earth and birds of the air. Then a voice told him, “Get up, Peter. Kill and eat.”

          “Surely not, Lord!” Peter replied. “I have never eaten anything impure or unclean.”

          The voice spoke to him a second time, “Do not call anything impure that God has made clean.”

          This happened three times, and immediately the sheet was taken back to heaven
          (Acts 10:11-16).

          Jesus frequently criticized these “Scribal Laws” (the Laws of Moses, which were known as commandments of which we know of The Ten Commandments but in fact there were well over 600 commandments!)….

          See Matthew 23:23 and John 8:3-11 (etcetera)

          It is also pointed out that Jesus, Himself, is the fulfillment of the Law (Matthew 26:28, Mark 10:45, Luke 16:16, John 1:16, Acts 10:28, 13:39, Romans 10:4) The sacrifice of Jesus on the cross – according to the New Testament and especially Saint Paul – that ended forever the need for food laws, scribal laws, animal sacrifices and all the aspects of the ceremonial law.

          Hebrews 9:11-15
          Galatians 2:15-20
          Ephesians 2:15
          2 Corinthians 3:1-18

          Luke 22:20
          Hebrews 8:13
          (This refers to the NEW Covenant replacing the Old Covenant – and the Old Covenant was that of the Old Testament which made the Jews the “Chosen People”, while the New Covenant was establishing the followers of Jesus Christ the Savior or Christians as the NEW Covenant… so it wasn’t me or some other individual or group deciding who was or was not God’s Chosen People – it was God himself through the words of the Bible as based upon God’s desires).

          In fact, the great theologian Thomas Equinas expressed a very strong belief that Christians would be VERY wrong to continue to follow those Old Testament “Laws of Moses”:

          “Theologian Thomas Aquinas explained that there are three types of biblical precepts: moral, ceremonial, and judicial. He holds that moral precepts are permanent, having held even before the Law was given, since they are part of the law of nature. Ceremonial precepts (the “ceremonial law”, dealing with forms of worshipping God and food laws and sacrificial laws and with ritual cleanness, etcetera) and judicial precepts (such as those in Exodus 21 came into existence only with the Law of Moses and were only temporary. The ceremonial commands were according to theologians ‘ordained to the Divine worship for that particular time and to the foreshadowing of Christ”. Accordingly, upon the coming of Christ those numerous scribal and ceremonial and ritualistic laws ceased to bind to Christians… and that to observe them now would, Aquinas stated, be equivalent to declaring falsely that Christ has not yet come, which for Christians a mortal sin… ”

          So, WHERE is the Biblical scripture on Food Laws that apply specifically (and would obviously be mandates) to CHRISTIANS???

          1. ella says:

            I see, for whatever reason, you can read and quote. Just not practice?

          2. Leroy says:

            Practice WHAT???


            That’s a laugh!

            Just because I know a tremendous amount of factual information about Christianity (clearly much more than YOU – who has yet to produce ANYTHING but PERSONAL OPINION) doesn’t mean there’s any type of mandate that I be Christian.

            Any more than just because I know a tremendous amount of factual information about the Quran and Islam means that I have to be Muslim.

            Nor any more than just because I know a tremendous amount of factual information about the Torah, the Hebrew Bible, the Old Testament mandates that I must be Jewish.

            But yes, I absolutely CAN read and CAN quote (factual sources… in this case repeatedly from YOUR beloved Bible) – things that apparently you can NOT do… even when it comes to your precious Bible!

            Do you practice? If so, I’d like to know what, as it assuredly isn’t Christianity or Judaism!

            P. S. Still waiting. If you haven’t produced anything by Monday, say, then I will probably start addressing some of your other erroneous comments at the very start of this.

        2. Larry says:

          I guess that I’m back to waiting a bit to see if you have a response (a REAL ONE) before wading into all of the other bogus information listed there.

        3. Leroy says:

          And also check out this (which is just from Leviticus):

        4. Leroy says:

          Romans 13:1-7 ESV / 195 helpful votes

          “Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed, and those who resist will incur judgment. For rulers are not a terror to good conduct, but to bad. Would you have no fear of the one who is in authority? Then do what is good, and you will receive his approval, for he is God’s servant for your good…. “

          1. Leroy says:

            Of course I guess she gets to pick and choose which Biblical Law (no longer applicable to Christians) that Kim Davis determines to follow – even though she is violating an Oath to God….


    2. Leroy says:

      Hmmm… that one question MUST be a really tough one!!!

      Now Roman Catholics (only a SMALL fraction of Christians) used to have all sorts of Fasting Days and Meatless Fridays, etcetera, but those were all “internal rules”, not based on ANY scripture or Biblical laws – just based on various edits issued by numerous Popes over the centuries since Roman Emperor Constantine forced the conversion of the Roman Empire to Christianity, invented what would become the Bible (what Books could go in and what ones were NOT allowed)… and appointed the Bishop of Rome who then became the first Pope.

      But those internal rules (like having priests and nuns, etcetera) were only for Roman Catholics. Then you have hundred million Eastern Orthodox Christian. And then there’s the Protestants (some 17,000 different sects – not churches, but separate sects!). And of course then there’s Mormons (which some Christian sects claim that they are also real Christians while others don’t). And Jehovah Witnesses and Seventh Day Adventists (who push a vegetarian diet, but again, based on their own internal rules and not any scripture-based Biblical Law).

      Well over a billion Christians (of all these different groups who deep down really believe that THEIR GROUP are the only REAL Christians) possibly violating God’s laws (commandments) by not eating right?????

      But I assume that you are still looking. Or maybe need to ask your minister or rabbi or priest or whatever this weekend, so I’ll hold off responding on the other items of BS… while I wait for your answer to just that ONE question.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!