Content deleted Content added
DJ Clayworth (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Christianjb (talk | contribs) |
||
Line 641:
The statement 'AiG does not condemn interracial marriage' is not really relevant, since hardly anyone does. Any reason why it should be there? Likewise I don't think the commentary on Leviticus is really appropriate. While it is 'taken as calling for the death penalty' in its original context, hardly any group, even among the most vociferous condemners of homosexual behaviour use it to suggest it be applied now. Unless there is some reason to think that AiG ''does'' call for the death penalty for gays then it doesn't really belong. Comments? [[User:DJ Clayworth|DJ Clayworth]] 18:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
:Yes, AiG specifically links to Lev several times in an article regarding homosexuality. They also claim that this law is relevant even today. It should not be removed- even if some find this offensive. [[User:Christianjb|Christianjb]] 23:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
| |||