Ted Cruz On Trump’s Amnesty Compromise: FORGET IT!

[INVAR]

You know what I mean and that ain't it.  (And, I dislike that question too.)

Well, if he happened to be walking' out thisa way spoutin' the kinds of stuff he does here as loud as he does, and happens to fall among a bunch of good-'ol boys who pummel him to a pulp - and I happened along his crumpled form, I wouldn't be going to the other side of the road to avoid him.   I would likely haul his carcass to a hospital and made sure he was taken care of. 

Of course when he regains consciousness he would get the obligatory lecture about the stupidity of coming into a community like ours to loudly bash Christians and the Confederacy. 

[Sanguine]

Well, if he happened to be walking' out thisa way spoutin' the kinds of stuff he does here as loud as he does, and happens to fall among a bunch of good-'ol boys who pummel him to a pulp - and I happened along his crumpled form, I wouldn't be going to the other side of the road to avoid him.   I would likely haul his carcass to a hospital and made sure he was taken care of. 

Of course when he regains consciousness he would get the obligatory lecture about the stupidity of coming into a community like ours to loudly bash Christians and the Confederacy.

Fair enough.  I'd probably do the same.  At least I hope I would.

[libertybele]

--- back on topic:

Ted Cruz: No US citizenship for 'anybody here illegally'

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said Thursday he opposes granting amnesty for anyone who entered the country illegally, even as President Trump is suggesting he was willing to pursue the option.

“I do not believe we should be granting a path to citizenship to anybody here illegally,” Cruz said Thursday. “Doing so is inconsistent with the promises we made to the men and women who elected us.”

Cruz’s comments come of the heels of Trump signaling he was open to the possibility of illegal aliens assuming citizenship.

“It’s going to happen at some point in the future, over a period of 10-12 years,” Trump told reporters on Wednesday. “I think it’s a nice thing to have the incentive of after a period of years being able to become a citizen.”

And on Thursday, the White House was reportedly floating the idea of granting citizenship to nearly 2 million illegal immigrants as long as other border measures were approved, including building the border wall and ending chain migration and the diversity visa lottery............

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Bullshit.  Christ doesn't compel you to hate - to the contrary!.  Using the Bible to justify such hate is the true abomination.

So, we finally found out your problem.  You cannot read.

[Bigun]

So, we finally found out your problem.  You cannot read.

He reads ok! It's the interpretation that gives him so much trouble.

[INVAR]

So, we finally found out your problem.  You cannot read.

He can read.  He choses to ignore the words and plain meaning because it doesn't fit with what he wants his Jesus to be and look like.

He only wants to follow a god that comports with his own fleshy value system, rather than changing his own warped views to match God's.

However, he has continually claimed to be a Conservative while demonstrating he is anything but a Conservative - seeking instead to redefine it to match his own liberal definition. 

I suspect his claims of actually being a Christian are exactly the same.  He claims to be one, yet his own words and behaviors illustrate him to be quite other than what he claims.

[Jazzhead]

For his eternal sake - I hope he would too, but hearts hardened to The Lord as scripture reveals is going to be a tough nut to crack.

"The mind governed by the flesh is hostile to God; it does not submit to God's law, nor can it ever." - Romans 8:7

Hostile to God?   Not me - I'm no atheist or agnostic.   But God didn't teach me to hate.   You say He does.  That's where we disagree.   We'll see who's right eventually.  Maybe we're both wrong.   I strongly disagree that faith alone (and its unfortunate corollary, blind adherence to dogma) is sufficient for salvation.  Good works and adherence to the golden rule is what's important, IMO.   Don't take such disagreement as meaning I'm hostile to God.  That's not my agenda at all.   

And just so there's no misunderstanding, since this all comes back to our respective views on gays and marriage - I have never defended homosexuality per se.   Homosexuals who cheat on their partners are just as sinful as straight guys who do the same.    Who I defend are my neighbors and others like them - who've been faithful to each other for years and years - just as you and I have been faithful to our spouses. 

Sexual orientation isn't a choice.   Sexual behavior is.   Promiscuity is the sin.  Divorce is the sin.  Monogamy and the sacred commitment it represents - regardless of the sexual orientation of the couple - is what needs to be praised, respected and encouraged. 

[txradioguy]

Sexual orientation isn't a choice. 

Bullsh*t.  It's just as much of a preference as it is when someone prefers redheads over blondes or big boobs over a nice butt...it's all a personal preference and choice.

Sexual behavior is.   Promiscuity is the sin.  Divorce is the sin.  Monogamy and the sacred commitment it represents - regardless of the sexual orientation of the couple - is what needs to be praised, respected and encouraged.

Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."


Now no one here is advocating that homosexuals be murdered...however the Bible clearly states that it's a sin and something that is an abomination.

And in the New Testament Jesus instructs his Disciples to obey his Father's word and teachings as if they were his own.

[edpc]

If they ever prove sexual orientation is genetic, watch how quickly homosexuals become pro-life when people start aborting pregnancies, because they don't want a gay child.

[libertybele]

Bullsh*t.  It's just as much of a preference as it is when someone prefers redheads over blondes or big boobs over a nice butt...it's all a personal preference and choice.


Leviticus 20:13 "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."


Now no one here is advocating that homosexuals be murdered...however the Bible clearly states that it's a sin and something that is an abomination.

And in the New Testament Jesus instructs his Disciples to obey his Father's word and teachings as if they were his own.

     There is something very wrong with our society when there are those who feel it is perfectly acceptable to make the vast majority go against the teachings of the Bible because a minority of the population is screaming discrimination and want their immoral behavior to be accepted as 'normal' and in fact it is now becoming commonplace that they are to be given preference and privilege over the heterosexual majority.

[INVAR]

Hostile to God?   Not me - I'm no atheist or agnostic.   But God didn't teach me to hate.   You say He does.  That's where we disagree.   

Your abject biblical ignorance about God is astounding.  You willfully choose to be so, by rejecting the plain word of Scripture for your own construct of what you want God to be.

God in-fact DOES hate, and spells it out.

These six things the LORD God hates: yes, seven are an abomination to him:
A proud look,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
A heart that devises wickedness,
feet that are swift to run to mischief,
A false witness that speaks lies,
and he that sows discord among brethren. - Proverbs 6:16-19

We'll see who's right eventually.  Maybe we're both wrong. 

The only one wrong on this subject is you.

Good works and adherence to the golden rule is what's important, IMO. 

As I said, your construct of God is what your own opinion of him is, not what He reveals of Himself in His Word.

Don't take such disagreement as meaning I'm hostile to God. 

Your own words reveal that you are.  You have numerous times, actually used the word 'hate' to describe the context of actual scriptures that were quoted to you.

Sexual orientation isn't a choice.   Sexual behavior is.   Promiscuity is the sin.  Divorce is the sin.  Monogamy and the sacred commitment it represents - regardless of the sexual orientation of the couple - is what needs to be praised, respected and encouraged.

Again, you demonstrate that you worship a god of your own construct - and reject the Word of God for your own morality.

[txradioguy]

    There is something very wrong with our society when there are those who feel it is perfectly acceptable to make the vast majority go against the teachings of the Bible because a minority of the population is screaming discrimination and want their immoral behavior to be accepted as 'normal' and in fact it is now becoming commonplace that they are to be given preference and privilege over the heterosexual majority.

It's been the plan by the left and their allies all along.  They need replace absolutes...wrong and right with 60 millions shades of gray.  Morals and adhering to the Bible are hateful and bigoted...you're considered progressive and open minded if you reject the foundations of what this country was built on and what has kept us strong when other nations have tumbled from one revolt to another and accept that which is immoral and goes against the Bible and the very documents that founded this nation as well as the men who built it.

[INVAR]

It's been the plan by the left and their allies all along.  They need replace absolutes...wrong and right with 60 millions shades of gray.  Morals and adhering to the Bible are hateful and bigoted...you're considered progressive and open minded if you reject the foundations of what this country was built on and what has kept us strong when other nations have tumbled from one revolt to another and accept that which is immoral and goes against the Bible and the very documents that founded this nation as well as the men who built it.

Well stated, and the fundamental reason why you cannot discuss liberty to the exclusion of biblical and religious principles.

[libertybele]

Well stated, and the fundamental reason why you cannot discuss liberty to the exclusion of biblical and religious principles.

Yes, very well stated.  This country was founded upon Christianity and the Constitution was written as our rule of law.  To deny either is why we found ourselves in the mess that we're in. 

[Jazzhead]

There is something very wrong with our society when there are those who feel it is perfectly acceptable to make the vast majority go against the teachings of the Bible because a minority of the population is screaming discrimination and want their immoral behavior to be accepted as 'normal' and in fact it is now becoming commonplace that they are to be given preference and privilege over the heterosexual majority.

Oh, horse manure.  Gays don't demand "preference and privilege", just the equal protection of the law.  And sure, they'd appreciate, as would we all, the respect of their neighbors.

One of the gladdest developments of the last 20 years is that most of us, most of the time, are perfectly willing to respect our gay neighbors and support their desires to marry and be free of arbitrary discrimination in their lives.

Live and let live. 

 But the religious zealots, as they always have, insist on imposing their morality on others.  Not content to living their own lives as free of sin as they can manage,  they refuse to serve gays, and hector them regarding their blasphemy, perversion and sin.   And, of course, the zealots then whack off to porn, beat their spouses (the Bible says they can), have affairs and get divorced. 

But, hey, at least they can hate gays and claim the endorsement of God!   

Well, no more.  Hopefully the law will continue to develop to allow gays the full ability to participate as valued members of the community.   Let the religious zealots stew in their fear (many are, I believe, closeted gays themselves).   

[DCPatriot]

Oh, horse manure.  Gays don't demand "preference and privilege", just the equal protection of the law.  And sure, they'd appreciate, as would we all, the respect of their neighbors.

One of the gladdest developments of the last 20 years is that most of us, most of the time, are perfectly willing to respect our gay neighbors and support their desires to marry and be free of arbitrary discrimination in their lives.

Live and let live. 

 But the religious zealots, as they always have, insist on imposing their morality on others.  Not content to living their own lives as free of sin as they can manage,  they refuse to serve gays, and hector them regarding their blasphemy, perversion and sin.   And, of course, the zealots then whack off to porn, beat their spouses (the Bible says they can), have affairs and get divorced. 

But, hey, at least they can hate gays and claim the endorsement of God!   

Well, no more.  Hopefully the law will continue to develop to allow gays the full ability to participate as valued members of the community.   Let the religious zealots stew in their fear (many are, I believe, closeted gays themselves).

 

[Cyber Liberty]

Let the religious zealots stew in their fear (many are, I believe, closeted gays themselves).

So, it's your opinion that people who disagree with you about the rightness of your crusade for homosexual "rights" do so because they are closeted gays?  I think that's pretty revolting, and a new low for you.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

Oh, horse manure.  Gays don't demand "preference and privilege", just the equal protection of the law.  And sure, they'd appreciate, as would we all, the respect of their neighbors.

One of the gladdest developments of the last 20 years is that most of us, most of the time, are perfectly willing to respect our gay neighbors and support their desires to marry and be free of arbitrary discrimination in their lives.

Live and let live. 

 But the religious zealots, as they always have, insist on imposing their morality on others.  Not content to living their own lives as free of sin as they can manage,  they refuse to serve gays, and hector them regarding their blasphemy, perversion and sin.   And, of course, the zealots then whack off to porn, beat their spouses (the Bible says they can), have affairs and get divorced. 

But, hey, at least they can hate gays and claim the endorsement of God!   

Well, no more.  Hopefully the law will continue to develop to allow gays the full ability to participate as valued members of the community.   Let the religious zealots stew in their fear (many are, I believe, closeted gays themselves).

Ironically, that fear should be the Islamist growth into the bowels of America, as those 'religious zealots' have no compunction in simply ridding the earth of the gays instead of ostracizing them.

[INVAR]

Gays don't demand "preference and privilege...

Yes they do, same as every other Democrat advocacy group.   and so do you as their staunchest advocate to force us to serve and support their deviant behavior.

One of the gladdest developments of the last 20 years is that most of us, most of the time, are perfectly willing to respect our gay neighbors and support their desires to marry and be free of arbitrary discrimination in their lives.

Unless you are Christian, then it is perfectly good to slam their faith as bigoted and intolerant while suing them into oblivion because they refuse to cater or acknowledge as good and normal, homosexual sexual deviancy.

Live and let live. 

Oh that's funny coming from you.   'Live and let live" as in the form of lawsuits designed to impoverish or shut down those nasty bigoted Christians who consider homosexuality to be an abomination. "Live and let live" in the form of punishing their livelihoods for refusing to cater to homosexual celebration and working to silence the same from having any vestige or appearance in the public square.

But the religious zealots, as they always have, insist on imposing their morality on others.

The ONLY people insisting on imposing their morality on others, is homosexuals and their Socialist/Liberal/Godless advocates like you who declare homosexual behavior as holy, good and normal and demand government and the courts impose punishment on those who consider that behavior wrong, sinful and abominable and offend the homosexuals and their advocates for holding to that belief.

they refuse to serve gays, and hector them regarding their blasphemy, perversion and sin.

As do you homosexuals and Advocates - which is their right.  Except that right of association only seems to go in one direction.   Homos can eject straights from their businesses while cruising them openly.  However, Faggotry must be served when demanded along with acknowledgment of their deviancy as something good and normal.  Failure to do so will earn declarations of bigotry and have legal and criminal actions taken against you.

And, of course, the zealots then whack off to porn, beat their spouses (the Bible says they can), have affairs and get divorced. 

...Let the religious zealots stew in their fear (many are, I believe, closeted gays themselves).

And that is exactly what we expect to come from the mouth of one of Satan's willing pawns.

[roamer_1]

Again, you demonstrate that you worship a god of your own construct - and reject the Word of God for your own morality.

The 'knowledge' of good and evil, in a nutshell.
That's the whole dang thing, right there.

[libertybele]

Gays don't demand "preference and privilege", just the equal protection of the law.  And sure, they'd appreciate, as would we all, the respect of their neighbors.

Yes gays do demand special preference and privilege -- I've witnessed it on several occasions and they do expect more than equal protection under the law.  As for respect, how can I show respect to someone whom I think leads an unnatural lifestyle?  I prefer to let those people well enough alone, but I certainly don't respect them or their lifestyle.

[TomSea]

Deny the dreamers but keeping chain migration that will allow a million in each year? It will take 60 Senate votes to change that law. I think Trump here, sees an opportunity and all of this is in the opening stages yet.

[libertybele]

Deny the dreamers but keeping chain migration that will allow a million in each year? It will take 60 Senate votes to change that law. I think Trump here, sees an opportunity and all of this is in the opening stages yet.

??? I'm trying to decipher what you've written here.

Trump has already publicly stated that he is willing to GIVE the Dreamers a pathway to citizenship.  We only hold a very slim majority in the Senate.  Secondly, I think it is important to consider the results granting 1.8 million citizenship.  That is potentially 1.8 million new DEM voters.  The writing after that is on the wall.

[Jazzhead]

Trump has already publicly stated that he is willing to GIVE the Dreamers a pathway to citizenship.  We only hold a very slim majority in the Senate.  Secondly, I think it is important to consider the results granting 1.8 million citizenship.  That is potentially 1.8 million new DEM voters.  The writing after that is on the wall.

That's a self-fulfilling prophecy given your rhetoric and others like you.  Hispanics are culturally conservative.  I prefer to be optimistic that our values are shared by all who are willing to work hard and aspire to better things.   

[Cyber Liberty]

That's a self-fulfilling prophecy given your rhetoric and others like you.  Hispanics are culturally conservative.  I prefer to be optimistic that our values are shared by all who are willing to work hard and aspire to better things.   

If Hisanics are "culturally conservative," why are you always singing their praises?  You are always talking about how horrible cultural conservatives are.