Christian Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?
Join For His Glory for a discussion on how
https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/
-
Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need
https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/
-
-
Depending upon the Holy Spirit for all you do?
Read through the following study by Tenchi for more on this topic
https://christianforums.net/threads/without-the-holy-spirit-we-can-do-nothing.109419/
-
-
How are famous preachers sometimes effected by sin?
Join Sola Scriptura for a discussion on the subject
https://christianforums.net/threads/anointed-preaching-teaching.109331/#post-1912042
-
Portland bans Texas goods and travel over abortion law.
- Thread starter JLB
- Start date
I have always said some form of secession is the only hope for America. Though the Fed. govt. will never allow it, it is taking shape through the natural divisions that exist and are widening.
And Portland's actions are proof of it. Just as Texas actions are proof of it.
I have no doubt that these instances will domino. Which will encourage the Feds to exercise their authority against Texas, as Portland is in lock step with the liberal govt we have in Washington. It would not surprise me if those in Washington put Portland up to this to create such a scenario.
Would the Feds do that?
Quantrill
And Portland's actions are proof of it. Just as Texas actions are proof of it.
I have no doubt that these instances will domino. Which will encourage the Feds to exercise their authority against Texas, as Portland is in lock step with the liberal govt we have in Washington. It would not surprise me if those in Washington put Portland up to this to create such a scenario.
Would the Feds do that?
Quantrill
The Fed‘s have no authority to do anything against Texas.
The Supreme Court has ruled.
Many more states will follow in the footsteps of Texas.
Florida is already in the process.
The ungodly ruling of Roe v Wade will be reversed in this nation.
JLB
You're right according to the Constitution. The problem is, if any know their history of America and the War Between The States, you will see that Constitution is easily tossed aside. Hence the problem.
Judge Taney ruled concerning the Dred Scott decision. The result: more inflammatory anger from the North. The Constitution was burned and declared a covenant with hell.
So, without a doubt Texas is in it's Constitutional right. But when the divide is this great, the Constitution doesn't matter.
Portland has no right to regulate commerce or travel between states. That is the duty of Congress only. Yet they will get the approval of the Feds because they are in lock step with the Feds. That doesn't mean Congress has sanctioned it.
The Constitution is out the window. Texas is the enemy to the Feds. She will be sanctioned, and block aided just as the U.S. does an enemy. Will she go alone? Possibly. But I think there are still some states composed of men and not guys. We will see.
Biden said this morning that Texas is unamerican. Can you believe that? He who abandoned Americans in Afghanistan, who gave a list of names of Americans to be slaughtered by the Taliban, is claiming Texas unamerican.
Assinine.
Quantrill
Last edited:
This is all so beyond messed up.
First, Roe v. Wade rules that banning abortion violates 4th amendment--illegal search & seizure. Meanwhile, the Patriot Act does not?
Second, Texas' vigilante law is also bogus.
Third, while it is true that Portland does not have the Constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce, neither does Texas have the Constitutional authority to regulate international commerce. Which Texas has done w/ respect to commerce with Israel. Texas also took upon themselves to police the international border--which, also, they are not Constitutionally allowed to do.
However, the Feds have plenty of authority to police Texas--seeing as how Texas is, after all, the United States. However, the Federal Supreme Court's ruling of Roe v. Wade is bogus in the first place.
Thoroughly screwed up on every level.
First, Roe v. Wade rules that banning abortion violates 4th amendment--illegal search & seizure. Meanwhile, the Patriot Act does not?
Second, Texas' vigilante law is also bogus.
Third, while it is true that Portland does not have the Constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce, neither does Texas have the Constitutional authority to regulate international commerce. Which Texas has done w/ respect to commerce with Israel. Texas also took upon themselves to police the international border--which, also, they are not Constitutionally allowed to do.
However, the Feds have plenty of authority to police Texas--seeing as how Texas is, after all, the United States. However, the Federal Supreme Court's ruling of Roe v. Wade is bogus in the first place.
Thoroughly screwed up on every level.
Yes, back then it was the Democrats who fought to keep slavery Intact.
Many young white Republicans fought and died to see slavery abolished.
I wonder how many people understand that?
JLB
First, the law by the Governor of Texas is not 'vigilante'.
Second, The border of Texas is first and foremost, the border of Texas.
The Feds have only the rights 'delegated' to them by the State of Texas. And even those rights can be taken back by the state. Hence the term 'delegated'.
Quantrill
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course it is. It allows citizens to file lawsuits if they ever catch someone seeking an abortion. They just turned a criminal matter into a civil one, and that is vigilante.
No. It is not.
That's not how the 10th Amendment works.
As far as your "you don't know what you're talking about", if you're going to use such language, as least be grounded in fact by a little bit.
No. When the Governor of a State enacts laws, that is not vigilante. And when the people of the State support that Governor, they are not vigilantes.
You don't like it. Too bad. You can't change it.
Oh yes, the border of Texas is first and foremost the border of Texas. Again, you don't like it, too bad.
Oh yes, that is how the 10th amendment works. Again, you don't like it,...you know the rest.
I use such language when persons demonstrate the need. As you have done.
Quantrill
What you said was this.
You present the war as a war over slavery. But slavery was just part of the war. It was the part used by some on both sides to try and gain support for its cause.
Did the South, who were solid democrats, want to keep slavery? Yes. Why? Because our whole economy was based on agriculture and slavery was an implement in that.
Did the North, who represented the new party of Lincoln, the republicans, want to end slavery? It all depends on who you talked to and the point in time when you did. Before the South seceded Lincoln was all for protecting slavery in the South, forever. Congress was preparing the then 13th amendment to do that and Lincoln said he would approve of it.
Did the North come down South to free the slaves? No. The North came down because the South seceded. It came down to force the South back into the Union.
So, you see? You presented the present day view of the 'Civil War'. The truths behind that war are hidden in America's propagandized history. And America doesn't want to hear the truth. She has created the lie. It remains for her people to believe the lie.
The lie: The evil people of the South were wanting to enslave the black man. The good people of the North wanted to free the black man. The good people of the North came down and whipped the evil South and freed the black man.
Quantrill
You're welcome. But it is concerning to me that such an important part of that war was unknown to you. It shows the degree our government has gone to hide the truths of that war.
They don't teach the history of it. They teach the lie of it. It makes hay today. Keeps the poor blacks on their political side. Keeps the evil whites under their heel.
Quantrill
Do you disagree with what I said ?
The Civil War was fought over slavery.
https://www.pbs.org/opb/historydetectives/feature/causes-of-the-civil-war/
What led to the outbreak of the bloodiest conflict in the history of North America? A common explanation is that the Civil War was fought over the moral issue of slavery. In fact, it was the economics of slavery and political control of that system that was central to the conflict. A key issue was states' rights.
The racist Democrats who started the KKK wanted to continue to benefit from the slavery of the blacks.
Only God is good.
The Republican President Abraham Lincoln desired to free the slaves, and live in an America that recognized liberty and justice for all.
Many white Republican men fought and died to see that slaves became free men.
Intelligence, patriotism, Christianity, and a firm reliance on Him, who has never yet forsaken this favored land, are still competent to adjust, in the best way, all our present difficulty.
First Inaugural Address on March 4, 1861 (CWAL IV:271)
JLB
Look...I have not given quotes or support for my statements at this time concerning the War Between The States. But I can. And I am quite willing to discuss it and remain even tempered about it. But it has been my experience that once the evidence is produced, it causes such an anger among those like yourself, that I get reprimanded or banned as a result.
Do you understand what I am saying? It's not my attitude that gets me banned concerning this discussion. It is the actual revelation of the truth of that War that gets me banned. Yall don't want to hear it. Much easier living with the lie.
Quantrill
Last edited by a moderator:
Its exactly what I stated before.
During the Civil War many white Republican men fought and died to see that slaves became free men.
No,. But, as I said, that is not your fault. It is what you were taught.
It becomes your fault when you refuse to listen and observe source information.
Why bring up the term liar? I never insinuated that.
I was very clear concerning slavery, the KKK, Lincoln, and the cause of the War Between The States.
Quantrill
Last edited by a moderator: