Boazy: << OLO is about 'working together toward truth' if nothing else. So, your completion of the picture is welcome. No, he was not jailed (I wasn't aware of this from what I read)...so.. substitute CONVICTED for 'Jailed' and we have a fuller story. >>

Er, no Boazy - when you bellow out something tendentious but patently untrue in support of one of your hateful rants, such as

<< Given that in Sweden, a pastor WAS JAILED for preaching in his own Church on Romans 1 and using some colorful language in his sermon... >>

or

<< The pastor was jailed in Sweden for preaching in HIS OWN CHURCH......
based on the beliefs of that faith. >>

it's anything but "working together toward truth". As happens so often here, it's Boazy telling porkies and some of us correcting you. And you still don't get it.

To have been truthful, you would have had to have substituted ACQUITTED for "JAILED" - but that wouldn't have achieved quite the same rabble-rousing effect, would it?

You don't get human rights either. For all your frequent aspersions cast on laws and covenants designed to protect them, your homophobic Swedish cohort would have been convicted if it wasn't for the existence of laws in the EC that protect rights of religious observance and free speech.

I think the Swedish laws look to be even more stupid than the Canadian ones, but your homophobic Swede might well have been convicted if there hadn't been an International court that potentially had jurisdiction over his case. Mind you, it's quite possible that the Swedish Supreme Court judges were smart enough to hand down a ruling that denied the homophobic godbotherer the 'martyrdom' he was clearly seeking.

BOAZ asserts that "OLO is about 'working together toward truth'". Well blow me down, as a detached newcomer to OLO, I would have thought the stark evidence - in his own recent posts - demonstrates that BOAZ is the last person to be able to say that with a straight face. Where is BOAZ "working towards truth" on human rights? on tolerance of non-Christian churches? on the nature of homosexuality? on ill-treatment of refugees?

Perhaps he has tried to work towards truth in the past - before I took an interest in OLO - and I've missed it all? But what I've observed in recent weeks is BOAZ asserting a prejudiced position and twisting the facts to suit his cast-in-iron position.

Look at today's post. When challenged by the truth, BOAZ concedes that his homophobic hero wasn't in fact jailed but merely convicted. BOAZ tries to wriggle out of this error/falsehood by claiming that this correction of (implied trivial) fact merely gives us a "fuller picture".

The probability of that Swedish conviction being overturned by the European Court of Human Rights - which to any reasonable person would demonstrate that the court system works well - leads BOAZ to conclude that "the real legislation is being MANIPULATED by scurrilous forces at the local level against Christians unfairly! I.e.. STAR chambers."

That doesn't sound like "working together towards truth". That sounds like BOAZ desperately twisting the facts to salvage something from his sinking position.

What is truth, asked Pontius Pilate - and would not stay for an answer.

CJ... the only article I read about the Pastor was the one I linked to.

It is NOT (20 exclamation marks) a 'porkie' to take from the headline

"PASTOR GETS PRISON FOR SERMON" -> "Pastor Jailed"

It is 'incomplete information' though to state it, in the absense of information that his conviction was appealed and he acquited.

Now.. You need to run through the 170 odd posts in 'How to Interpret' because clearly 'my training' of you :) has not benefited you in the least.

'GETS PRISON' can only be interpreted ONE way "He..got..prison"

How far is that from JAILED or IMPRISONED ? you are toooo desperate to label me and undermine my credibility (as Perilous is want to do)

The day that 'GETS PRISON' cannot mean 'JAILED' is the day we see flying pigs. I can agree that there is a fine line, between 'actually put in jail' and 'gets prison' but if you are that pendantic then I feel sorry for you.

TO the issue. GREEN

http://www.akegreen.com/

Just have a look at how the Secular Politicians/gay lobby has twisted Swedish law so as to CRIMINALIZE the Bible. It cannot be said that just 'preaching' is criminal because bibles (containing the 'hate' speech) are sold in many bookshops.

It is CRIMINAL to say anything 'disrespectful' about Homosexuals by Swedish law.

The European Human Rights might seem to protect Green.."TODAY" but you can bet your bottom dollar the Gay lobby will be working to end that for TOMORROW.

Clearly, obviously, transparently.... 'Human Rights' are being manipulated by perverted interest groups for their own social benefit and the oppression of faith groups like Christianity.

Today 'criminals'
Tomorrow.'sub humans'
Day after Tomorrow 'gas chambers, gulags and graves'?
or...
Cromwell?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism#Evangelical_Alliance

Trends CJ... 'trends'.....

I'll BET that if you were a German in 1938 you would have criticized the 'whining Jews' about 'Stars of David'..

"what are you people worried about.. its just a dress code"

*shakes head in dismay*..and you wonder why I get passionate about these things?

Really Mr BOAZ, the more you defend yourself the worse you make your position.

You argue that you took a headline, "PASTOR GETS PRISON FOR SERMON", at face value, and so can't be accused of telling a porkie. So what can you be accused of? Ignorance? Laziness? Reliance on biased sources? Unwillingness to assess all the evidence? Desperately seeking to defame homosexuals and human rights activists?

You would have seen that that headline you rely on was first published on July 08, 2004 and was re-released on a Christian propaganda publication in 2008. We might ask, Why? because this is a well-known case (Google 'Pastor Ake Green' and you will see the plethora of commentary; even Wikipedia covers it).

Green was acquitted by the Swedish Court of Appeal in February 2005 and that decision was upheld by the Supreme Court in November 2005. A reading of both judgments will confirm the courts found that Pastor Green had the right and was free to preach the way he did.

In the light of these easily confirmed facts, your plea that 'GETS PRISON' can only be interpreted ONE way "He..got..prison" is limp and unconvincing. As is your accusation that CJ is pedantic. Is it pedantic to ask that you do some research and to expect that you would not rely totally on a headline?

A bit of honest research would also reveal that Pastor Green's defense attorney was Percy Bratt, the Chairman of the Swedish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights. What does this say about your repeated diatribes against human rights activists?

It's not CJ who undermines your credibility, Mr BOAZ. Fewer histrionics and more objectivity might help your cause.

I don’t agree with the Pastor Boisoin however, I do support his right to preach whatever he believes and for others to disagree with him.

I was greatly saddened when the Muslims had a Christian group banned in Melbourne. I think the Victorian anti-vilification laws are a public disgrace and should be rescinded immediately.

I would support David Irvine coming to Australia to preach his version of holocaust revisionism because I believe only by respecting the rights of ones (opinion) adversaries to express their personal view do we protect our own right to free expression.

As for the gay community, our friends of pillow biting fame, well what can I say, you do unto one another whatever you like but please do not expect it to become compulsory or for me to join the movement.

I agree with the idea that homosexuality is both abnormal and deviate but I believe in tolerance so accept a gay persons right to choose to be abnormal and deviate.

As for the Bible, well it is a book the text of which has been massaged and manipulated to suit the politics of medieval Europe, thus whilst it might parody the word of God, I do not think anyone, blessed with reasoning skills could ever accept it as the word of God.

And organised religions have a lot of corruption upon their hands, the cover-ups being more depraved than the deviate acts of the priesthood.

As to the Church of Rome, in particular, what can I say, the most serious threat to the future of mankind is burgeoning populations numbers. The CoR keeps on its public and clandestine campaigns to deny effective contraception to the worlds poor, presumably preferring to simply see more starving Catholics than fewer well fed Catholics. Is seems all about getting the numbers through the door, no different to cinema marketing

Hi Col.. (still working on getting free, haven't forgotten)

you said:

"As for the Bible, well it is a book the text of which has been massaged and manipulated to suit the politics of medieval Europe,"

Can you flesh that out a bit with some examples and sources please?

Ra Homosexual behavior.. sure..they can do what they like..it's their funeral, literally:

http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/22SxSo/PnSx/HSx/hosx_lifspn.htm
Criticism of the Cameron study here:
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/rainbow/html/facts_cameron_obit.html

but the point I'm concerned about is the manipulation of the LAW in ways which persecute (and I mean PERSECUTE) Christians for simply stating what the Bible teaches.

If we publically proclaimed Galatians 1:8 we could be in trouble also. (need to see what it says) but sure as night follows day, we would proclaim it or at least teach it in our Bible schools and Churches.

It's only a small jump from banning speech which is 'offensive' to any group, to banning the SOURCE and basis for that speech, which in the case of Christians is the Bible.

Were it not for this kind of law, I'd not be thinking twice about the matter.
It's not like we spend every 2nd sunday (or 52nd) navel gazing and preaching about the evils of homosexual behavior.
I don't think I've EVER heard a sermon on "Homosexuality is evil"

It would crop up in passing if a preacher was working his way through Romans.