@Proverb n RVP

Ive read "strong ethics" on the 'equations' posted...


strong ethics have had Mavuno labelled as too liberal.
same ethics have dismissed Akorino and legio Maria as either archaic or sect.
strong ethics have had the protestants castigate catholics on drinking and smoking.
strong ethics have had catholics even refuse contraceptives in a marriage.
strong ethics have Sunni Saudi Arabia use sharia law while sunni Iraq allowed their women to wear trousers.

Strong ethics demand we abhor abortion
Strong ethics dictate gossip is bad.. bribing is bad jumping queue is bad... things that 99% of kenyans are guilty of.

Ethics from any point of view are relative...

Firstly No Comment on your disclaimer



This Depends.
If your opinion differs from mine, the above is true.
If your opinion differs from scripture(Gods opinion), the above is false.




God Ruled Israel via his servants the Judges, Samuel was the last Judge, The people wanted to be ruled by kings like their neighbors, this distressed Samuel, God clarified to Samuel that it was not he that they had rejected but God.



The laws of the land were present and in operation before during and after the reigns of Israels kings. There were also laws wherever the people of Israel were captives.



here i beg to quote the actual text...

John 19:6 When therefore the chief priests and the officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him! Pilate saith unto them, Take him yourselves, and crucify him: for I find no crime in him.




Remember as you render to Ceasar what is Ceasar's you render to God what is God's. The meaning of this is.... in whose image are YOU made. Then to God you should render your life.
Which is greater? what you render to Ceasar of what you render to God?



I beg to say this.

1.If you profess Christianity, your hope is not
in a constitution or anything outside of the
Lord your God.

2. If you are handed a choice between having a
law to govern your affairs that can
potentially hinder the free exercise of your
faith and a law that does not hinder you...
you choose the latter.

@poundfoolish , you fear radical Christians. Those Radical Christians fear Radical Muslims. Who do Radical Muslims fear?
while the radical Christians may justify their fundamentalism (citing 9/11, Kikambala Bombing , August 7th Bomb Blast).
What can you say you fear about the Christian radicals?
The Christian radicals in the US are against Obama because he is just another DOMOcrat.
I have noticed that this world is full of sissies and cowards. people who have no SPINE. whenever some1 stands and goes against the grain (anti-political correctness) he is seen as a fundamentalist and all in good intention (to UNITE all so you cede a little space and sing kumbaya) but remember the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
I have heard people accusing the church that during the last election it took sides. Who didn't? the Muslims did (NAMLEF with ODM and SUPKEM with PNU), the media did, people on SK did, some Churches DID. so as you point figures remember that their are 4 more pointing at you (your 3 and 1 from ME)

The problem, with churches, was taking sides then invoking the name of the one and same God..
I for once was left wondering which 'God' did they consult cos he gave them different answers.there was a maseno diocess god a mnt kenya god, the methodists said yes, the ACK leaned no...God Forbid!

If you follow immediate history you will note that, the radicalization of the muslim has something to do with the conservative evangelicals in America. watch Christian Amanpoors 'Gods Warriors' and you will understand, none of the so called radicals have any basis. its either a 'sura' in the Koran, a verse in the bible or a claim to anti-semitisim.. but the real fight is nothing really spiritual par se.

so please note 'we' are not SPINELESS, 'we' are tactful, 'we' are calculative and 'we' are patient..
'we' just use, and i repeat, use, the radicals at the right time.. like now.
NB. We here stands for non-radicals.
Osama/Taliban/Bithers/Republicans/Democrats(last elections)/ODM/PNU etc all have think tanks that work hard and long on the background and at the right time provoke situations that radicals cant waste..

I'll ask you a blant question..

Do you think it is by sheer ignorance/arrogance or duress that the so contentious Abortion clauses and subclauses survived all amendments.


with the countries African Values, with the majority of the population and political leaders and the COE being either Christian or Muslim.
This is politics my friends constitution is still politics

34. Freedom of the media

(2) The State shall not—
(a) exercise control over or interfere with any person engaged in broadcasting, the production or circulation of any publication or the dissemination of information by any medium; or
(b) penalise any person for any opinion or view or the content of any broadcast, publication or dissemination.

Doesn't this section regalise pornography?

[/quote]

And the exception?