CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

Have you read the law?

If the same thing had happened at a masque, everyone would go to jail.

If you don't want to go to jail, follow the law.

Let's be very clear, if this had happened in my church in Houston, there is a high likely hood that someone gets shot.

BusterAg said:

---

So, the FACE act specifically protects places of worship from:

1) people vandalizing the place of worship
2) Interfering with people's 1st amendment rights of religious freedom in a place of worship

The penalty is up to 6 months in jail and fines up to $10,000 for first time offenders.

Let's be very specific. This law was worded to specifically prevent exactly this type of activity. Anyone that broke into a church service mid-service with the intent to disrupt this service is guilty of breaking this law. It is an open and shut case. The only way that any of these defendants could defeat a case against them with this evidence is to have SCOTUS declare the law unconstitutional.

Text from the law, you are guilty if:
"(1) by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person because that person is or has been, or in order to intimidate such person or any other person or any class of persons from, obtaining or providing reproductive health services;

(2) by force or threat of force or by physical obstruction, intentionally injures, intimidates or interferes with or attempts to injure, intimidate or interfere with any person lawfully exercising or seeking to exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship; or

(3) intentionally damages or destroys the property of a facility, or attempts to do so, because such facility provides reproductive health services, or intentionally damages or destroys the property of a place of religious worship,"

Every one of those protestors is guilty of breaking this law, including Lemon. It is impossible to argue otherwise.

I would love to see Don Lemon do 6 months in jail. But, it might be even better if you got Lemon to plea down to no jail time if he goes on the air, apologizes, explains the law, and tells all of the protestors to go home.

I am sure that this law was origionally intended to protect abortion clinics, Masques and Jewish Temples, but Christian Churches get the same protection as a Masque.

EVERY ONE OF THESE PEOPLE NEED JAIL TIME!!!

If you stepped foot in that church, you need to go to jail.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/103rd-congress/senate-bill/636/text

---

Not a damn thing will happen to any of those democrat terrorists.

BusterAg said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

Have you read the law?

If the same thing had happened at a masque, everyone would go to jail.

If you don't want to go to jail, follow the law.

---

If it happened in a mosque, no one would be left alive to go to jail.

There's a lot of guns at churches now days. This is a good way to get yourself shot.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

El Chupacabra said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

As a Christian, I'm disappointed the church isn't a crime scene with lots of chalk.

I believe that terrorists should suffer swift, aggressive consequences that ends their ability to terrorize ever again.

Christians, the right, conservatives have turned the other cheek for too long, and now it is out of control. These terrorists aren't far from chaining doors shut and lighting buildings on fire.

---

So not Christianity. Nothing in the Gospels tells of turning The Jews or Roman's into chalk lines

---

So per your interpretation, hiring an off duty armed cop to protect the worship service and potentially kill a gunman is not Christianity. We should simply let the gunman come in and kill everyone?!

---

That would be an extreme understanding today.

However, not out of line of early Christian followers during the pre-Nicene. It would have been the prevailing ideal at the time.

I don't believe this is the case for me. I think there is an obvious case for defending the lives of your family and friends.

IN THIS CASE NO WAS ONE PHYSICALLY HARMED.

You are creating false scenarios to justify the ends you desire

---

That's not a false scenario. It has happened and will happen. I didn't say it happened here. Based on your interpretation of scripture, it seemed you would be opposed to having armed guards ready to kill people who attacked a service.

The early church was persecuted by the government. That's not what happened here so your entire argument is based on a false premise. Advocating for the government to punish criminals is NOT anti Christianity. There is no scripture anywhere that says that.

Don Lemon should be the first person arrested and prosecuted. Give him the J6 Special.

I am glad the US Department of Justice is investigating a group of protesters in Minnesota who disrupted a church service at a congregation where a local U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement official is believed to serve as a pastor.

Cities Church's website lists David Easterwood as a pastor. His personal information appears to match that of the David Easterwood identified in court records as the acting director of the ICE St. Paul field office. Easterwood appeared alongside Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem at a Minneapolis news conference last October.

https://newschannel9.com/news/nation-world/justice-department-investigates-protest-at-minnesota-church-tied-to-ice-official-federal-inquiry-worship-disruption-st-paul-congregation-cities-congregation-immigration-enforcement-agency-field-director-civil-rights-case-activist-demonstration

The Bible doesn't say "don't punish people who break the law". Liberal Christians have misunderstood the "turn the other cheek" passage. In Christian theology, Christ is described as meek (Matthew 11:29) and blessed are the meek (Matthew 5:5), but this is frequently misunderstood as passivity or weakness. Biblical meekness is defined as "strength under control." It does not mean ignoring injustice, but rather addressing it without pride, ego, or sinful rage.

BusterAg said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

Have you read the law?

If the same thing had happened at a masque, everyone would go to jail.

If you don't want to go to jail, follow the law.

Let's be very clear, if this had happened in my church in Houston, there is a high likely hood that someone gets shot.

---

Your church would shoot someone that is unarmed for entering the building and causing a scene?

That's not terribly law and order or Christian. It's just illegal and wrong.

I'm guessing you are not in charge of any security.

Edited…. Don't want to offer information to possibly put my identity on the boards. Too many hateful people that go after people in this world.

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

El Chupacabra said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

As a Christian, I'm disappointed the church isn't a crime scene with lots of chalk.

I believe that terrorists should suffer swift, aggressive consequences that ends their ability to terrorize ever again.

Christians, the right, conservatives have turned the other cheek for too long, and now it is out of control. These terrorists aren't far from chaining doors shut and lighting buildings on fire.

---

So not Christianity. Nothing in the Gospels tells of turning The Jews or Roman's into chalk lines

---

So per your interpretation, hiring an off duty armed cop to protect the worship service and potentially kill a gunman is not Christianity. We should simply let the gunman come in and kill everyone?!

---

That would be an extreme understanding today.

However, not out of line of early Christian followers during the pre-Nicene. It would have been the prevailing ideal at the time.

I don't believe this is the case for me. I think there is an obvious case for defending the lives of your family and friends.

IN THIS CASE NO WAS ONE PHYSICALLY HARMED.

You are creating false scenarios to justify the ends you desire

---

That's not a false scenario. It has happened and will happen. I didn't say it happened here. Based on your interpretation of scripture, it seemed you would be opposed to having armed guards ready to kill people who attacked a service.

The early church was persecuted by the government. That's not what happened here so your entire argument is based on a false premise. Advocating for the government to punish criminals is NOT anti Christianity. There is no scripture anywhere that says that.

---

Never stated there was. Where did I state there was scripture? If I misspoke I apologize. Point it out to me and I'll offer a retraction.

BusterAg said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

Have you read the law?

If the same thing had happened at a masque, everyone would go to jail.

If you don't want to go to jail, follow the law.

Let's be very clear, if this had happened in my church in Houston, there is a high likely hood that someone gets shot.

---

A hate crime is still a hate crime... Or do we make exceptions now.

Remember when Merrick Garland created a domestic terrorism task force to investigate parents who were being tagged by the FBI as a domestic terror threats by going to school board meetings?

Wonder what these protestors would have received if they were there to support ICE under a Biden administration?

Bet they wouldn't try that in a Mosque.

Also the mis translation of "enemy" does not help in Christians pushing this weak false doctrine.

It's brother or member of your community, not someone trying to kill you or others.

Everyone have a great day. The argument is not healthy and productive past a point. I understand the gist of your feeling and I think you understand where I'm coming from.

I respect why you guys feel the way you do. I feel those same feelings and frustrations.

I simply wanted to offer up an alternative take that my beliefs align with.

Have a great day and pray for our country.

Wow, Interference with a church service is a red line for most Americans.

Anyhow, what a bunch of clueless idiots. It's also more evidence against thier side as being out of control, lawless, etc

Silvertaps said:

---

Interested to see where this goes. Today it was about immigration, soon it can be about a specific churches stance on abortion, LGBTQ, Israel…really any social issue where it contradicts. If Don Lemon and his mob get away with it, the precedence will be set for copy cats.

---

They're getting away with it in one of the most liberal cities in America.

This would not stand at our church. Police would have closed the entrance at the first site of the mob and called in backup immediately. If needed additional support would have come quickly from the Sheriff's Dept and DPS. They'd shut it down and people go to jail and no slap on the wrist from there. And of course, LEO's would have the full backing on the church goers and the local community in general.

Just goes to show you we are truly two Americas that can not co-exist.

It's fine that you feel that way. It isn't a crime against you, though. You aren't the victim and neither are those that were in that church trying to worship. It is a crime against the state and federal government. Your opinion on prosecution only matters if you end up on the jury. Once on that jury, you can wrestle with your belief vs the oath you take when sworn in.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

El Chupacabra said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

As a Christian, I'm disappointed the church isn't a crime scene with lots of chalk.

I believe that terrorists should suffer swift, aggressive consequences that ends their ability to terrorize ever again.

Christians, the right, conservatives have turned the other cheek for too long, and now it is out of control. These terrorists aren't far from chaining doors shut and lighting buildings on fire.

---

So not Christianity. Nothing in the Gospels tells of turning The Jews or Roman's into chalk lines

---

So per your interpretation, hiring an off duty armed cop to protect the worship service and potentially kill a gunman is not Christianity. We should simply let the gunman come in and kill everyone?!

---

That would be an extreme understanding today.

However, not out of line of early Christian followers during the pre-Nicene. It would have been the prevailing ideal at the time.

I don't believe this is the case for me. I think there is an obvious case for defending the lives of your family and friends.

IN THIS CASE NO WAS ONE PHYSICALLY HARMED.

You are creating false scenarios to justify the ends you desire

---

That's not a false scenario. It has happened and will happen. I didn't say it happened here. Based on your interpretation of scripture, it seemed you would be opposed to having armed guards ready to kill people who attacked a service.

The early church was persecuted by the government. That's not what happened here so your entire argument is based on a false premise. Advocating for the government to punish criminals is NOT anti Christianity. There is no scripture anywhere that says that.

---

Never stated there was. Where did I state there was scripture? If I misspoke I apologize. Point it out to me and I'll offer a retraction.

---

You said this:

"As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed."



Why would you say "as a Christian" if your view of not prosecuting them is not based on biblical scripture?! Why include that?!

Marlin39m said:

---

It's fine that you feel that way. It isn't a crime against you, though. You aren't the victim and neither are those that were in that church trying to worship. It is a crime against the state and federal government. Your opinion on prosecution only matters if you end up on the jury. Once on that jury, you can wrestle with your belief vs the oath you take when sworn in.

---

I wouldn't be selected. I would be disqualified.

I understand my views are a bit extreme.

I wish they'd prosecute people having loud conversations before mass.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Marlin39m said:

---

It's fine that you feel that way. It isn't a crime against you, though. You aren't the victim and neither are those that were in that church trying to worship. It is a crime against the state and federal government. Your opinion on prosecution only matters if you end up on the jury. Once on that jury, you can wrestle with your belief vs the oath you take when sworn in.

---

I wouldn't be selected. I would be disqualified.

I understand my views are a bit extreme.

---

Your views are your views and that's fine.

But your views are not scriptural, which you admitted.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

Have you read the law?

If the same thing had happened at a masque, everyone would go to jail.

If you don't want to go to jail, follow the law.

Let's be very clear, if this had happened in my church in Houston, there is a high likely hood that someone gets shot.

---

Your church would shoot someone that is unarmed for entering the building and causing a scene?

That's not terribly law and order or Christian. It's just illegal and wrong.

I'm guessing you are not in charge of any security.

Edited…. Don't want to offer information to possibly put my identity on the boards. Too many hateful people that go after people in this world.

---

I'm not saying it would be a good shoot or not, but our armed police officer has physically removed someone that was causing a scene before. Once the kid saw that an officer was going to push him out of the building, he just left.

There are young children in that building, and someone willing to barge into a church and screams into an old man's face is not acting logically, and who knows what he is going to do.

Once a physical altercation starts, who knows where it goes.

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

El Chupacabra said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

As a Christian, I'm disappointed the church isn't a crime scene with lots of chalk.

I believe that terrorists should suffer swift, aggressive consequences that ends their ability to terrorize ever again.

Christians, the right, conservatives have turned the other cheek for too long, and now it is out of control. These terrorists aren't far from chaining doors shut and lighting buildings on fire.

---

So not Christianity. Nothing in the Gospels tells of turning The Jews or Roman's into chalk lines

---

So per your interpretation, hiring an off duty armed cop to protect the worship service and potentially kill a gunman is not Christianity. We should simply let the gunman come in and kill everyone?!

---

That would be an extreme understanding today.

However, not out of line of early Christian followers during the pre-Nicene. It would have been the prevailing ideal at the time.

I don't believe this is the case for me. I think there is an obvious case for defending the lives of your family and friends.

IN THIS CASE NO WAS ONE PHYSICALLY HARMED.

You are creating false scenarios to justify the ends you desire

---

That's not a false scenario. It has happened and will happen. I didn't say it happened here. Based on your interpretation of scripture, it seemed you would be opposed to having armed guards ready to kill people who attacked a service.

The early church was persecuted by the government. That's not what happened here so your entire argument is based on a false premise. Advocating for the government to punish criminals is NOT anti Christianity. There is no scripture anywhere that says that.

---

Never stated there was. Where did I state there was scripture? If I misspoke I apologize. Point it out to me and I'll offer a retraction.

---

You said this:

"As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed."



Why would you say "as a Christian" if your view of not prosecuting them is not based on biblical scripture?! Why include that?!

---

As an imitation of Christ.

I'm not really one of the Sola Scriptura wacky types.

Remember when the money changers defiled God's house? Flipping tables and using a whip was an acceptable response.

Cyprian said:

---

Wow, Interference with a church service is a red line for most Americans.

Anyhow, what a bunch of clueless idiots. It's also more evidence against thier side as being out of control, lawless, etc

---

There was also a law specifically passed to prevent this type of behavior, to the letter, and it comes with jail time.

I know this: Christians being thrown to the lions polls well with the lions.

Quote:

---

I'm not really one of the Sola Scriptura wacky types.

---

Dude, this was 100% uncalled for.

fc2112 said:

---

Remember when the money changers defiled God's house? Flipping tables and using a whip was an acceptable response.

---

Well, I think Christ was uniquely suited to defend his "Fathers House".

Obviously, I don't believe that I have that same street cred.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

No one was harmed physically, this time. Every member of this church now has to deal with the effects of this despicable incident moving forward. If there are no consequences for this attack, it will be repeated until someone is injured or killed.
The whole point of this crap is to spread chaos. The Democratic Party leadership does not give a crap about their supporters nor the victims. They want talking points to use dishonesty against conservatives.

• The organizers first job is to create the issues or problems, and organizations must be based on many issues. The organizer must first rub raw the resentments of the people of the community; fan the latent hostilities of many of the people to the point of overt expression. He must search out controversy and issues, rather than avoid them, for unless there is controversy people are not concerned enough to act. . . . An organizer must stir up dissatisfaction and discontent.
  Saul Alinsky
  

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

El Chupacabra said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

As a Christian, I'm disappointed the church isn't a crime scene with lots of chalk.

I believe that terrorists should suffer swift, aggressive consequences that ends their ability to terrorize ever again.

Christians, the right, conservatives have turned the other cheek for too long, and now it is out of control. These terrorists aren't far from chaining doors shut and lighting buildings on fire.

---

So not Christianity. Nothing in the Gospels tells of turning The Jews or Roman's into chalk lines

---

So per your interpretation, hiring an off duty armed cop to protect the worship service and potentially kill a gunman is not Christianity. We should simply let the gunman come in and kill everyone?!

---

That would be an extreme understanding today.

However, not out of line of early Christian followers during the pre-Nicene. It would have been the prevailing ideal at the time.

I don't believe this is the case for me. I think there is an obvious case for defending the lives of your family and friends.

IN THIS CASE NO WAS ONE PHYSICALLY HARMED.

You are creating false scenarios to justify the ends you desire

---

That's not a false scenario. It has happened and will happen. I didn't say it happened here. Based on your interpretation of scripture, it seemed you would be opposed to having armed guards ready to kill people who attacked a service.

The early church was persecuted by the government. That's not what happened here so your entire argument is based on a false premise. Advocating for the government to punish criminals is NOT anti Christianity. There is no scripture anywhere that says that.

---

Never stated there was. Where did I state there was scripture? If I misspoke I apologize. Point it out to me and I'll offer a retraction.

---

You said this:

"As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed."



Why would you say "as a Christian" if your view of not prosecuting them is not based on biblical scripture?! Why include that?!

---

As an imitation of Christ.

I'm not really one of the Sola Scriptura wacky types.

---

I've never read where Christ said criminals should not be punished. He's going to throw people into hell to be punished forever. I think he is pro punishment for evil doers.

Sorry, but your view would be complete anarchy and crime on the planet.

CDUB98 said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not really one of the Sola Scriptura wacky types.

---

Dude, this was 100% uncalled for.

---

I apologize. I disagree with the notion of Sola Scriptura.

CrackerJackAg said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

Remember when the money changers defiled God's house? Flipping tables and using a whip was an acceptable response.

---

Well, I think Christ was uniquely suited to defend his "Fathers House".

Obviously, I don't believe that I have that same street cred.

---

Are we to be more Christ-like or not?

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

El Chupacabra said:

---

CrackerJackAg said:

---

As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed.

I would pray, for an obvious miracle, that these people find God.

---

As a Christian, I'm disappointed the church isn't a crime scene with lots of chalk.

I believe that terrorists should suffer swift, aggressive consequences that ends their ability to terrorize ever again.

Christians, the right, conservatives have turned the other cheek for too long, and now it is out of control. These terrorists aren't far from chaining doors shut and lighting buildings on fire.

---

So not Christianity. Nothing in the Gospels tells of turning The Jews or Roman's into chalk lines

---

So per your interpretation, hiring an off duty armed cop to protect the worship service and potentially kill a gunman is not Christianity. We should simply let the gunman come in and kill everyone?!

---

That would be an extreme understanding today.

However, not out of line of early Christian followers during the pre-Nicene. It would have been the prevailing ideal at the time.

I don't believe this is the case for me. I think there is an obvious case for defending the lives of your family and friends.

IN THIS CASE NO WAS ONE PHYSICALLY HARMED.

You are creating false scenarios to justify the ends you desire

---

That's not a false scenario. It has happened and will happen. I didn't say it happened here. Based on your interpretation of scripture, it seemed you would be opposed to having armed guards ready to kill people who attacked a service.

The early church was persecuted by the government. That's not what happened here so your entire argument is based on a false premise. Advocating for the government to punish criminals is NOT anti Christianity. There is no scripture anywhere that says that.

---

Never stated there was. Where did I state there was scripture? If I misspoke I apologize. Point it out to me and I'll offer a retraction.

---

You said this:

"As a Christian I am not sure I agree with prosecution. No one was harmed."



Why would you say "as a Christian" if your view of not prosecuting them is not based on biblical scripture?! Why include that?!

---

As an imitation of Christ.

I'm not really one of the Sola Scriptura wacky types.

---

Much better to trust an institution that started the Crusades, and protected pedophile clergy, right?

Sola Scriptura isn't all that wacky when you consider how often institutions go astray.