User Profile: Oldmantex


Member Since: December 15, 2011


123 To page: Go
  • [1] October 23, 2014 at 9:27pm

    Jim S – One more thing, stop using the divorce as an argument for them being hypocrites. The Bible is clear on who can get a divorce and still not violate Gods law. Just because someone is divorced, does not mean they have committed the sin of adultery. So unless you know someone that they married and know for a fact that their divorce was adulterous, you cant make that assertion. Thanks

  • [1] October 23, 2014 at 9:23pm

    Jim S – Sorry but you are incorrect. This man is an ordained and that means he is acting in a religious and church manner when preforming a wedding. If he was not ordained and just a JP I would agree with you. But by forcing him to preform a wedding against his will is the same exact thing as forcing a priest or pastor to marry homosexuals against their beliefs.

    Who cares where the location is, that is irrelevant. He could be doing this at a lake in a state park and that does not mean he would have to consent to preforming homosexual weddings. He is an ordained minister and that never changes, period.

    You cannot separate the business from the owner in a wedding ceremony as the person preforming the ceremony is the center of the ceremony, not the facility. My point is in the case of weddings, the man (pastor) is the business.

    Now if they rented out their place and let anyone use it for weddings and let other people able to preform weddings in and tried to block the homosexuals from using it, I would agree. But in this case he preforms all the weddings and therefore he is the business.

  • [1] October 21, 2014 at 9:40pm

    It is a hoax.

  • [3] October 21, 2014 at 9:13pm

    JQ – what a stupid statement, your a better Christian and your a Jew LOL
    So you follow the teachings of Christ and believe he is God? and your a Jew? Please explain.

  • [14] October 21, 2014 at 11:09am

    That cop is about to give this guy the best one time tip he has ever received from any tax payer. Sweet, get the ignorant cop to read the law out loud and then break the law himself, best evidence for a law suit I have seen in a long time. Enjoy the free tax payer money music man!!

  • October 18, 2014 at 3:04pm

    But the Catholic church did split and become the Roman catholic church, so no its not the same church from the beginning. Funny how roman Catholics always forget that.
    Guess what, when it split it took on a whole list of new teachings that were not practiced before, doing exactly what you like to blame protestants for.

  • [7] October 15, 2014 at 9:41pm

    Sorry folks but sodomy inst political speech. If we allow government to take over topics in our Bible and label them political speech, we no longer have freedom of religion. Sodomy has been spoken of for over 4k years. Long before the constitution was written and long before the city of Houston changed its laws.

    So if the government decides that prayer is political speech, then we can no longer pray? What about debt can big CC companies take over a city council and outlaw speech that says debt is bad, that it is now political speech because they have a dog in the hunt? The list goes on for ever, as so many topics are spoken of in the Bible.

  • [70] October 12, 2014 at 10:32am

    What is everyone worried about? You know 4000 marines with a 3 hour course will be more qualified to fight this virus than a trained health professional.

    If ever there was a time to disobey a direct order, this was it. Now we will get 4k potential carries home in a few months and they could decimate our military.

    Responses (8) +
  • [34] October 9, 2014 at 7:22pm

    The only correct stance to have with pre-trib and post-trib is a pan-trib.

    That is what I am, a Pan-Trib. Because as a believer, I know it will all pan out in the end!!

    Those who are worried that a pre-trib rapture believer wont be prepared for the tribulation if there is no rapture, need not worry. If someone is a true believer in Christ, then God will take care of him regardless of the situation.

    If there is no rapture then what do believers in Christ have to fall back on. Lets see:
    Noah being spared
    David being spared
    Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego
    Issac being spared
    Joseph being spared and saving millions

    So we have example after example of God sparing his children. Either way, it will all PAN out!!

    Responses (3) +
  • [2] October 4, 2014 at 11:45pm

    Christ made it pretty simple as to what he wanted preached to others to bring them into repentance. But people in this thread make it out like you need a doctorate degree to understand Christ. So so sad….. Im glad I am not part of “Roman Catholic Church” anymore as I never hear any talk about Christ from any of them, and only constant talk about THEIR CHURCH.

    Sorry folks the church doesn’t save you, Christ does. If God cant reveal the truth to me because some how man got in the way by changing his book, then he isn’t a God at all.

  • October 4, 2014 at 10:55pm

    JB – Do you even believe that Peter was the Apostle sent to Rome? Just curious, as I personally dont think he was, but that was Pauls job and the Bible has evidence to prove that.

    This is also very interesting – Gli Scavi del Dominus Flevit

    Written by Catholic priest btw.

  • [9] October 3, 2014 at 12:03pm

    Skunk – I didnt know you had that level of clearance. Please list all targets eliminated by Chris and what their current dealings were in the middle east. Then we can start to decide if they posed a threat to your freedoms. Thank you.

  • [17] October 3, 2014 at 10:15am

    Zapp you are a hypocrite. You tell people if they dont like it, change the law. Well that is exactly what they are doing and using the courts to do it just like liberals. Maybe thats why you are so upset……

    Btw be careful what you ask for, politics is a pendulum and when it swings back conservative, it might get really uncomfortable for folks that think like you.

    Me, I dont care. I am more libertarian and grow that way daily. But that means in this case the giffords have every right to refuse serving people they disagree with. And the gays have every right to get married somewhere else if state laws approve it.

  • [3] September 28, 2014 at 6:37pm

    He could have just not said a word and handed them his insurance and license. He is not legally obligated to say a single word or answer a single question.

    Responses (1) +
  • September 26, 2014 at 2:55pm

    Total hogwash, this guy has not fired a single shot at the “public.” The only reason they want this guy dead is they THINK he did it. They are not the judge, and when you give the police that power, you become slaves. Ask mexico how it works if your disagree.

    They are kicking people out of their homes for ONE reason. To ensure there are no pesky videos placed on youtube showing them gun this man down when he surrenders peacefully.

    Nothing a cop hates more than getting amp-ed up like this guy is doing to them, and then having to use self control and apply the law as required, not as they desire.

  • [2] September 26, 2014 at 2:19pm

    Isnt it ironic that some news stories have implied this guy shot cops because of their illegal and unconstitutional actions. Then they commit more illegal and unconstitutional actions in the pursuit of catching the person that was sick of those events.
    He has done his job if his goal was to expose how corrupt the police have become in America.

  • [2] September 26, 2014 at 2:15pm

    That is one of many illegal things that jumped out to me in this article. Innocent until proven guilty folks. If you can not support that, dont cry when its your head on the evidence free chopping block.

    @habana – no one said that if he shoots at them they can not return fire. But this article does not say that is the standing order. It says there is a shoot to kill on him if he does not turn himself in. That is two totally different scenarios. I hope you see that.

  • September 26, 2014 at 2:01pm

    First there is nothing controversial about restating an opinion of others. Atheist have said this all along, so its nothing exciting.

    Second and the more shocking part of this story is that the media feels the need to attack a person who they will never answer to.

    Why does what this guy believe matter to anyone that he is not going to represent? Let his constituents deal with his beliefs. This is just another example of the actual close mindedness of BOTH parties.

    Well if you dont think like me you are a nutter and cant hold office!! Oh no i dont live in your district, but that doesnt matter you dont agree with me so you should not be allowed to represent people that do agree with you.

    Sounds pretty nutty if you ask me, far nuttier and more dangerous than anything this man has said.

  • [3] September 26, 2014 at 1:45pm

    The word salvation in reference to a song is NOT establishing a religion. So in this case the atheist are wrong.

  • [3] September 26, 2014 at 11:44am

    Just remember Mark 12 when making comments about how giving, the church may be.

    43 And he called his disciples to him and said to them, “Truly, I say to you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the offering box. 44 For they all contributed out of their abundance, but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.”

123 To page: Go