United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: High School tennis stars score religious liberty victory in Washington state
Source:
The Daily Sheeple
URL Source: https://www.thedailysheeple.com/hig ... y-victory-in-washington-state/
Published: Aug 31, 2019
Author: Sean Walton
Post Date: 2019-09-01 12:24:22 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 7752
Comments: 185
Siblings Joseph & Joelle Chung Two high school tennis stars scored a religious liberty victory in Washington state after being kicked off the court for their faith. The Chung siblings, Joseph, 15, and Joelle, 17, both Seventh-day Adventists, a Protestant denomination that observes Sabbath on Saturday as recorded in the Bible, sued the Washington Interscholastic Activities Association (WIAA) earlier this month after Joelle was disqualified from her final state tennis postseason competition because she doesn’t play on Saturdays. The Chung family, represented by Becket, a religious liberty law firm, filed a motion to withdraw their federal suit on Tuesday after WIAA agreed to add religious observance to its reasons for missing games without being penalized. Paul Chung, Joelle’s father, told “The Ingraham Angle” earlier this month that his daughter, who was undefeated on the court, valued her commitment to God more than tennis. “She was disappointed that she couldn’t help the team but she shouldn’t have to choose between religion and playing tennis,” Chung said. Joe Davis, Becket counsel and attorney for the Chungs, told Fox News Friday “it’s an important win for religious student-athletes in Washington and sets a favorable precedent nationwide.” “It’s common sense that Sabbath observers shouldn’t be excluded from any postseason sports competition at all just because of the hypothetical possibility of a schedule conflict somewhere down the line—and after the rule change, they won’t be.” WIAA denied her family’s request for a religious accommodation last season because WIAA’s previous rules stated that if an athlete could not commit to playing in every level of the tournament, barring injury or illness, they were not allowed to participate at all and would be subject to penalty. WIAA had no exception for sincerely-held religious beliefs. “For the Chung family, keeping the Sabbath holy is a serious commitment,” Becket, a religious liberty law firm, wrote in a complaint filed Aug. 6. The Chungs, both playing for William F. West High School, had conflicts with the WIAA’s state championship schedule, which included a Saturday. While Joelle had to sit out her final postseason play, Joseph, a rising sophomore, was set to have the same fate this year before the rule change. “We’re hopeful that the WIAA will take the next step and eliminate the schedule conflicts altogether, as the law requires,” Davis added. Delivered by The Daily Sheeple
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-26) not displayed.
.
.
.
#27. To: Tooconservative (#11)
My point is: at the present time I do not observe Saturday or Sunday. God seems like He's okay with it. He understands that I farm. He understands that Christians play sports on Saturday or Sunday. We are not under the Law! Nobody can keep the Law anyway. Except Christ keeps it for us! There is no Law that says: if you don't go to Church you'll be stoned to death.
They never opened on Sunday morning. It was a one time special meeting. Or perhaps occasionally.
Well, these Adventists differ with you. And they have lawyers apparently.
I would side with your wife if she sued them. There are no special steakhouse emergencies that require Sunday attendance. It sounds like wrongful termination.
You're saying you want to disqualify athletes on the basis of religious practice. It is interesting to see a sabbatarian court case. In 2019. With two Adventist athletes. The Chung family may be on the verge of setting vital legal precedent.
I don't want to, but they knew the rules when they signed up. Let's keep in mind, SHE refused to play. It's not as though the WIAA didn't allow her to play on the basis of her religious practice.
This is how it was when I was a kid. High School football was on Friday nights...only. I was shocked when I found out that high schools in other parts of the country had games on Saturday. I remember this because I photographed high school sports and I thought how nice it would be to photograph a daytime game. Of course, week day games would never work for college and pro. It's not going to happen...well, aside from Monday Night Football and Thursday Night Football.
Maybe you'd be even happier if Christian athletes were free to spend Sunday in worship and demand that society honor their commitment to their lord and savior, Jesus Christ. Wouldn't that be just as good? Wouldn't it be better? But perhaps you prefer instead to insist to young people that their religious practice (unless Muslim or pagan) is completely unimportant compared to playing games that less then 0.1% of them will ever get a full scholarship to play in college, let alone play professionally. Or is it that you just don't like having a sabbath at all and don't want any dusty old bible verse telling you to "remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy", the same way that Jesus Himself kept it holy?
No, the WIAA decided to schedule games to punish the participation of these athletes who the WIAA had cause to know would not participate on their sabbath. The WIAA could have scheduled around these conflicts but they chose exclusion and persecution, possibly depriving these athletes of a chance to earn a scholarship. Surprising how anti-Christian some Christians suddenly are when you pit something they actually like (high school sports) against something they don't really like, like some cruddy old 4th Commandment that stretches on through multiple verses about keeping the sabbath holy and no dodging the rule cleverly. So should this rule you like requiring participation on a sabbath apply to Christians only? Should it apply to Muslims? How about Jews? Would you allow Jews to keep the 4th commandment and not punish them for it?
Well, if they are building a career, using their God given talents, they may have to miss some church, wouldn't you say? Christians aren't known for making demands The Bible says "Not by power, nor by might, but by the Spirit" Now, please tell how YOU keep the Sabbath holy...
Ah, you don't like the mention of keeping the sabbath holy. That's okay. There's a lot of people now who are hostile to the very idea of holiness. People don't want to measure their own lives against a word like "holiness". It's funny how "keeping the sabbath" devolved in Western countries over last century or two. "Keeping the sabbath" turned into "attend church for an hour or so on Sunday morning". And the "keep it holy" part kind of disappeared from Christian thinking altogether. Along with wisdom, holiness has disappeared as being among the most desirable traits - really the most essential traits - that any Christian can develop over decades. I can't recall the last time I heard a sermon extolling holiness, holy living or prayer to ask God to impart His grace and His wisdom to us. When I was young, we still heard a few sermons like that a year. We're too busy on Facebook to pursue wisdom. Holiness will have to wait until after we get a few more spiritualish tattoos on our thighs. It hasn't been all that long since the pursuit of holiness and wisdom were sermon topics heard in any church in America. You had churches that were all about holiness and holy living, like the old Wesleyan holiness churches. They were quite strict about courtship, secular entertainment, etc. Maybe they've all died out and their great-grandchildren are a bunch of tranny atheists or something like that. You do notice, though, that people don't seem to want to measure their lives against any yardstick of holiness.
Might I conclude you don't like it either? I have asked how YOU keep the Sabbath holy... What day do you consider to be the Sabbath...Saturday? Sunday? For instance, do you refrain from posting on the Sabbath? (Would you be found quarreling on those Sabbath posts). Do you attend church or temple? Do you shop for groceries on Sabbath? Go out to eat? My Mennonite folks will not even answer the phone on Sunday. How exactly do YOU keep the Sabbath holy?
I don't care that much. I'm more interested in how people reconcile their use of scripture to how they conduct their lives. It's a total disconnect. In the vast majority of churches, they only invoke the fury of OT writings for That Stuff that they don't like. Not because it is a great sin but because they have fewer things they agree to be publicly condemning about. What I'm waiting for is the invention of the sinless church for the sinless Christians. We're almost there. And I don't give out very much personal info online. An old habit. And this is an anonymous chat board after all. I get it, the idea of being totally holy on the sabbath. But what if that phone call was to summon them to put out a small fire near their church. And by not answering the phone, their church burns to the ground and requires they restrict their missionary funding and their local charity efforts for years. Answering a phone is not unholy on any day of the week. Do they think, perhaps, it is only unholy on Sunday but perfectly holy the rest of the week? Or are they willing to compromise with the sin of phone use 6 days a week but go for holiness only on the sabbath. The phrase "to keep it holy" can be read several ways. You might keep it holy by dedicating a whole day of worship and family activity and charity work. That probably counts as holiness in any Christian church. However, there is a minimalist element of observation of the sabbath: the one day a week you avoid doing unholy things. The one day a week you really restrain your usual impulses to gossip or overlook the needy or break traffic laws or see your mistress or spend a little alone time with Pornhub, well, whatever your usual sin habits are. I've been interested in this sabbatarianism for many years. From farmers doing no work on Sunday (unless a heifer is calving) down to "no gross sins on Sunday" and now to Christians who resent other Christians who do observe a sabbath day faithfully and expect their civil rights to be respected by society. And so we have misterwhite and you on this thread, expressing considerable resentment toward these two Adventists who expect to have their sabbath respected? What, do they think they deserve equal rights with Muslims or Jews or something? They're going to ruin everything with their sabbath nonsense!
Never gonna happen. As long as we are in this world we are going to sin. The church is made up of sinners. Paul, speaking in the present tense, is saying he is, at that moment, the chief of sinners...what does that say about the rest of us Christians? Thanks, TC, I appreciate your answers.
Oh? They said that? Or are you just making shit up again? "So should this rule you like requiring participation on a sabbath apply to Christians only?" She wasn't "required" to do shit. She chose not to participate, knowing full well she would be disqualified. The rules were written long before she signed up. They apply to everyone. She wanted the league to make an exception just for her.
Isn't it time that we just rewrite that pesky Fourth Commandment? How about: "Forget the Sabbath. And don't you dare to keep it holy." Seems to be about what most of you think about the 4th commandment and any idea of keeping a sabbath holy (whatever that entails). I find it interesting, how people apply or refuse to even acknowledge these supposed landmark ideas about religion in the Jewish or Christian context. You know who is going to really like these two Adventists? Jewish lawyers and judges and Jewish legal scholars. For obvious reasons. I would not bet against the chances for the two Adventists to make Saturday a more respected sabbath under the law than Sunday is at present. I, of course, am cheering for the Adventists, those two lone witnesses for holiness and religious observation.
Thanks for this reminder. I'd forgotten how funny Zechariah and Zerubabbel really were so I had to go back to re-read it.
Other than these two Adventists, how many people has this rule actually affected? Hundreds of Christians? Thousands? How many people, other than these two, will a rule change affect? Any? You are turning this issue into a grand theological debate when it only affect two fanatics who interpret the fourth commandment differently than everyone else.
She chose to participate on non-sabbath days, something well within the power of the sports conference to accommodate. You may not be aware of it but a lot of the civil rights we have today come from cases involving Jehovah's Witnesses back in the Thirties when they had an especially fiery and apocalyptic leader. And the Adventists have their place in our law books, though less so than the Jehovah gang. Heck, even the God-hates-fags Westboro Church won a very major victory at the Supreme Court some years back. (The Westboro church also likes God-hates-soldiers, God-hates-you, God-hates-America too.) All of the founder's children had gotten law degrees and one of the daughters, Margie Phelps, served as lead counsel in their case which was heard by the Supreme Court and which they won resoundingly. Associate justice Alito was the lone dissenter. I enjoy their rendition of "God Bless America" with their new lyrics: "God hates America". Very catchy. So you've got an opinion. But the Adventists have lawyers that have already won a significant civil rights victory and pinned back the ears of the local youth sports mafia. And it is just eating your shit alive to think about that, isn't it? Is it that you have surrendered so much already to accommodate the world, knowing you've gotten almost nothing in return or did you just hate the general idea of holy living to begin with? It's hard to get convincing answers to such questions.
I see. So, in your opinion, it is only "fanatics" that would insist on observing the 4th commandment in any meaningful way instead of dismissing their religious obligations entirely so they can play some crappy bush league sport at which they have a 0.1% chance of ever getting a scholarship, let alone make a living at? I liked you better when you stuck to simple copsucking as a hobby.
How about: "Remember the Sabbath, how Jesus Christ kept it perfectly holy for me, because I couldn't..." That is the substitutionary life that we Christians enjoy.
That's a good answer, as good as you'll get. I think Vic would like that if you've read some of his posts before. Jesus did quote nine of the ten commandments though. I'm not sure that you've dealt with that adequately. But maybe you prefer to plow on through and hope God doesn't hold a little deliberate commandment-breaking against your record.
I don't call a tennis tournament "meaningful". They insist on changing the rules of a crappy bush league sport which affected nobody before they showed up and will affect nobody when they leave.
Or so you hope. You fear that this might spread or you wouldn't be so vehement against these Adventist commandment fanatics. You realize, perhaps, that the two Adventists could set a legal precedent to stop all school sports on weekends while the churches continue playing their puny little league sports on Sundays? Making the churches the most unholy commandment-breakers in American society? That outcome is entirely possible. I think you know it.
If it spread and more and more players refused to play because of their devotion to their faith, then perhaps the WIAA would be open to a rule change. That's how things used to be done. "You realize, perhaps, that the two Adventists could set a legal precedent to stop all school sports on weekends … …" You say that like it's a good thing. Two people, for purely selfish reasons, changing the rules for participants from 800 statewide schools through threat of legal action just so they can play under their interpretation of the fourth commandment.
And good for them. They adhere to their religion. In much the same way that Abraham, for purely selfish reasons, adhered to his new religion. In much the same way that Jesus and the Apostle Paul, for purely selfish reasons, adhered to their religious tenets. You can apply "purely selfish" to almost any religious figure who ever made any history at all. And it is generally the case that those who do stand up for their "purely selfish reasons" are despised in their own era by a majority of the public. And this case is no different. You underestimate the power of this case. It has genuine disruptive potential. And you just can't stand the thought of it. I'd like to see it go all the way to the Supreme Court and set national precedents.
What these two Adventists have done is open the door for Muslims to sue. They'll be playing tennis in burkas soon thanks to the Adventists. What a terrible shame against the Adventists...how dare they take non-Christians to court against the clear teaching of Scripture.
So you're ready to tell all Christians they can never take anyone or any organization to court again ever just so you can justify denying their sabbath rights to two mediocre Adventist tennis players? Is that right? But I'm sure they would assure you that they are not dragging inter-Christian disputes into the secular courts. 2 Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? 3 Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? 4 If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. 5 I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? 6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. 7 Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? 8 Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren. No, they are dragging a secular organization into court to compel that secular organization to make reasonable accommodation of their solemn religious observance. They are not suing their (alleged) fellow-Christians, something I'm sure they would be quick to point out to you. You're welcome. I'm liking these Adventists more all the time.
What if they strictly adhered to Leviticus 20:13 in the Bible: "And if a man lie with mankind, as with womankind, both of them have committed abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." Should we change the laws to accommodate them? Is it still, "Good for them"?
Should we be forced to stop eating pork because it offends Muslims and Jews? Here's what I think. I think if Muslims and Jews don't want to eat pork, they should not eat pork. If the 99% of the rest of us want to eat pork, we eat pork. Now, do you get the analogy or do I have to spell it out for you?
I agree. But I believe that if you're going to disrupt society over a religious issue, it should be to remove obstacles to the practice of someone's faith, not force the rest of us to adhere to the tenets of their religion. "and set national precedents." Uh-huh. Ready for Sharia law?
Sure. And why not? America is far from unique in its religious traditions but there are a few that stand out. Thanksgiving is one. In Europe at that time, businesses were subject to closure for the various feast days of the Roman church. And in most cases, the business owners not only had to close but were forced to subsidize these feast days directly. This was widely resented. This was Thanksgiving, a post-harvest festival as an element of state-sponsored religion. In America, no establishment of the church was allowed. And in the era prior to the dozen or so official holidays we now have as federal holidays, in America businesses did not have to pay for religious gatherings and food for the public and they did not have to close and give their workers the day off. America instituted the secular Thanksgiving tradition. Now it has devolved to where it's been turned into one of the few 4-day weekends in the calendar. So you give your employees the day off for Thanksgiving and they all expect to get Black Friday off too (not applicable for employees of Xmas-oriented-retail outlets or food/lodging establishments who rarely even get holiday overtime pay). In part, this is what we mean when we talk about Protestant work ethic. But few people know the story of America's Thanksgiving and why it was actually a radical modification of what America's immigrants had experienced in Europe before they came here. Even fewer care anything about it except for a few oddballs like me. But I like both the old-style secular Thanksgiving with workers still toiling in their mills and I like these litigious but plucky Adventists.
So if we don't stop these mediocre Asian tennis players now, then Osama bin Laden will finally win? LOL You can't be serious. However, you might see a push by Hindus, Muslims, Jews to make reasonable accommodation to their religions, just as Sunday and even Saturday are unpopular to schedule games or tournaments even today. These Adventists are taking a torch to Saturday/Sunday sports events or practices at the public schools. Which is why you seem to hate them.
Pork is not tennis. Food choice from a menu is not comparable to offering equal opportunities to participate in publicly-funded sports and other activities in the public schools. And check just how much halal meat is being fed into our schools via federal programs. Then check how much meat at your local meat outlet is also halal-compliant (meaning acceptable to both Muslims and Jews). Muslims have most of the same dietary issues that Jews have. Muslims are allowed to eat kosher food as it is considered as proper as halal slaughter methods. And they are definitely winning the Battle Of The Carcass. And that carcass is decidedly not pork, the single most negative factor affecting future growth of the pork industry in America. They are maxed out on their domestic market already. Because they are not halal/kosher and never will be.
So do you want them to violate Leviticus or are you suggesting they have already violated Leviticus? I don't even understand why you want to drag sodomy into an issue about reasonable accommodation of religious observance of the 4th commandment. Yes. No. Maybe. I'm not sure what you're even driving at here. Wanting to play tennis on a schoolday instead of your sabbath day should not be compared willy-nilly to acts of sodomy. You're becoming deranged over these Adventists and their subversive sabbath-keeping ways. You sound like you're afraid of them or something.
Sure it is. She HAD an equal opportunity to participate in publicly-funded sports and other activities in the public schools. She CHOSE not to participate. And that's my point. We have pork and you can choose not to eat it. You want to change the rules and eliminate pork because some don't like it.
If you're willing to change the rules to accommodate the religious observance of the 4th commandment (that apparently only two people observe), I'm asking if you're willing to change the rules (laws) to accommodate the religious observance of the Bible -- specifically Leviticus 20:13? Don't act so obtuse.
Hate them? No. I admire them for their devotion to their faith. If they believe their faith says they can't play, they don't play. Period. If that results in negative consequences, so be it. What bothers me is them using the threat of a lawsuit to make changes to long-established rules (which they initially accepted) simply to accommodate their personal needs.
Let me repeat this...seems you missed it: Read 1cor.6:1-6 over and over again until you get it. Christians must avoid going to the courts...with believers and non-believers. Why? Because we are "aliens and pilgrims" in this world (1Peter 2:11) This world is not our home. The courts are not ours. We are foreigners from another land...we are not here to force our will upon this world. We are here to be "salt and light" and that's about it. The Adventists make a big fuss about being "holy"...the word means set apart/separate. They are not exactly being separate from the world when they use the world's court system to impose their will.
And that invalidates any insistence that amateur league high school sports reasonably accommodate requests for respecting religious observance obligations which occur on weekends completely outside the official hours of school attendance. You're on far weaker legal grounds than you can apparently imagine.
Why progress to the regulation of sodomy if you can't even agree on keeping the sabbath holy? Apparently, you have some sodomy issue you're trying to work out. "Well, if you Yankees don't give in to sports on Saturday, we'll all start buttfucking each other just to get revenge on you." Where's the connection in your mind between sodomy and remembering the sabbath, to keep it holy? You don't have a fetish about committing sodomy on the sabbath, do you?
Comments (68 - 185) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestBig deal. Everyone engaged in animal husbandry works seven days a week.
#28. To: Tooconservative (#26)
I do have sympathy for that situation. Maybe the steak houses shouldn't open up so early so their employees can attend services and have some family time. Even waiting to open at 11am would help a lot.
#29. To: watchman (#27)
God seems like He's okay with it. He understands that I farm. He understands that Christians play sports on Saturday or Sunday.
#30. To: A K A Stone (#28)
They never opened on Sunday morning. It was a one time special meeting.
#31. To: misterwhite (#24)
Yay, heathen though I may be, rules are rules.
#32. To: Tooconservative (#31)
You're saying you want to disqualify athletes on the basis of religious practice.
#33. To: Tooconservative (#2)
Personally, I don't think they should allow sports and school events on weekends. At all. Let the kids and families have their time free. The same applies to early starts for summer practice for kids' sports.
#34. To: watchman (#22)
I love to see Christian athletes out there on Saturday and Sunday being an example for Christ!
#35. To: misterwhite (#32)
Let's keep in mind, SHE refused to play. It's not as though the WIAA didn't allow her to play on the basis of her religious practice.
#36. To: Tooconservative (#34)
Maybe you'd be even happier if Christian athletes were free to spend Sunday in worship
and demand that society honor their commitment...
#37. To: watchman (#36)
Now, please tell how YOU keep the Sabbath holy...
#38. To: Tooconservative (#37)
Ah, you don't like the mention of keeping the sabbath holy.
#39. To: watchman (#38)
(Edited)
Might I conclude you don't like it either?
My Mennonite folks will not even answer the phone on Sunday.
#40. To: Tooconservative (#39)
What I'm waiting for is the invention of the sinless church for the sinless Christians. We're almost there.
This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief. 1Tim. 1:15
#41. To: Tooconservative (#35)
No, the WIAA decided to schedule games to punish the participation of these athletes who the WIAA had cause to know would not participate on their sabbath.
#42. To: misterwhite, watchman (#41)
#43. To: watchman (#36)
The Bible says "Not by power, nor by might, but by the Spirit"
#44. To: Tooconservative (#42)
Seems to be about what most of you think about the 4th commandment and any idea of keeping a sabbath holy (whatever that entails).
#45. To: misterwhite (#41)
(Edited)
She wasn't "required" to do shit. She chose not to participate, knowing full well she would be disqualified.
#46. To: misterwhite (#44)
You are turning this issue into a grand theological debate when it only affect two fanatics who interpret the fourth commandment differently than everyone else.
#47. To: Tooconservative (#42)
How about: "Forget the Sabbath. And don't you dare to keep it holy."
#48. To: watchman, Vicomte13 (#47)
That is the substitutionary life that we Christians enjoy.
#49. To: Tooconservative (#46)
it is only "fanatics" that would insist on observing the 4th commandment in any meaningful way
#50. To: misterwhite (#49)
They insist on changing the rules of a crappy bush league sport which affected nobody before they showed up and will affect nobody when they leave.
#51. To: Tooconservative (#50)
You fear that this might spread or you wouldn't be so vehement against these Adventist commandment fanatics.
#52. To: misterwhite (#51)
Two people, for purely selfish reasons, changing the rules for participants from 800 statewide schools through threat of legal action just so they can play under their interpretation of the fourth commandment.
#53. To: misterwhite, Tooconservative (#51)
"You realize, perhaps, that the two Adventists could set a legal precedent to stop all school sports on weekends … …"
If any of you has a dispute with another, do you dare to take it before the ungodly for judgment instead of before the Lord’s people? 2 Or do you not know that the Lord’s people will judge the world? And if you are to judge the world, are you not competent to judge trivial cases? 3 Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more the things of this life! 4 Therefore, if you have disputes about such matters, do you ask for a ruling from those whose way of life is scorned in the church? 5 I say this to shame you. Is it possible that there is nobody among you wise enough to judge a dispute between believers? 6 But instead, one brother takes another to court—and this in front of unbelievers! 1Cor.6:1-6
If we Christians are not to take other Christians to court, how much less are we to take non-Christians?
#54. To: watchman (#53)
If we Christians are not to take other Christians to court, how much less are we to take non-Christians?
Biblia: 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 6 Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
#55. To: Tooconservative (#52)
And good for them. They adhere to their religion.
#56. To: Tooconservative (#54)
No, they are dragging a secular organization into court to compel that secular organization to make reasonable accommodation of their solemn religious observance.
#57. To: Tooconservative (#52)
You underestimate the power of this case. It has genuine disruptive potential.
#58. To: watchman (#53)
What these two Adventists have done is open the door for Muslims to sue.
#59. To: misterwhite (#57)
Uh-huh. Ready for Sharia law?
#60. To: misterwhite (#56)
Here's what I think. I think if Muslims and Jews don't want to eat pork, they should not eat pork. If the 99% of the rest of us want to eat pork, we eat pork.
#61. To: misterwhite (#55)
What if they strictly adhered to Leviticus 20:13 in the Bible:
Should we change the laws to accommodate them? Is it still, "Good for them"?
#62. To: Tooconservative (#60)
Food choice from a menu is not comparable to offering equal opportunities to participate in publicly-funded sports and other activities in the public schools.
#63. To: Tooconservative (#61)
I don't even understand why you want to drag sodomy into an issue about reasonable accommodation of religious observance of the 4th commandment.
#64. To: Tooconservative (#59)
These Adventists are taking a torch to Saturday/Sunday sports events or practices at the public schools. Which is why you seem to hate them.
#65. To: Tooconservative (#54)
But I'm sure they would assure you that they are not dragging inter-Christian disputes into the secular courts.
If we Christians are not to take other Christians to court, how much less are we to take non-Christians?
#66. To: misterwhite (#62)
We have pork and you can choose not to eat it.
#67. To: misterwhite (#63)
If you're willing to change the rules to accommodate the religious observance of the 4th commandment (that apparently only two people observe), I'm asking if you're willing to change the rules (laws) to accommodate the religious observance of the Bible -- specifically Leviticus 20:13?
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]