March 18 "No to the Draft Anti-Discrimination Act"
, mediante un acto publico y entregando un documento en la Intendencia Regional correspondiente. On March 18, 12.00, 5 regions evangelicals try to make their voices heard in a peaceful way to reject "anti-discrimination Project" through a public act and deliver a paper at the Regional Inspectorate for.
They have already confirmed their participation pastors of the I, V, VIII, X and MR. Some of the organizations that has joined this initiative are: Evangelical Regional Coordinator of the Bio Bio, Council of Pastors of Concepcion, Talcahuano, Coronel, Lota, Chiguayante, Tomé, San Pedro de la Paz, Penco, Hualpén, Osorno; Army Evangelical de Chile, Chile Evangelical Cathedral, Evangelical Movement for Family and Life, Group University Eagles, Issachar Movement, MECH, evangelical professor Region VIII; Purranque evangelical professor.
Some of the recommendations for the peaceful expression are taken Declaring formal placards and banners that say "Yes to the family" or "God loves everyone but hates sin, but that in no circumstances be attacked or mention of homosexuals .
WHAT IS ALL THIS??
Former President Ricardo Lagos during his tenure in 2005 sent to Congress a bill to strengthen anti-discrimination policies. This bill you can see the end of this article.
Years have passed and this project is in its second constitutional before it is approved. , con multas de hasta 200 UTM aprox., es decir más de cinco millones de pesos, e indemnizaciones, dañando indudablemente el patrimonio de cada congregación, incluyendo los Templos de Adoración. If enacted this bill, the pastors or any member of the different churches would be affected by such drastic sanctions, for example, go to jail for preaching against homosexuality or sexual status of individuals, with fines UTM 200 approx., ie more than five million pesos, and compensation, certainly damaging the heritage of each congregation, including the Houses of Worship.
A committee of pastors of Santiago made a series of signs the bill, which were not considered . Among the writings made by the committee, notes that "Since the Bible is our guide and absolute authority, we submit to it in each issue, including human sexuality. The Bible has a very positive position for the man in marriage, and based on monogamous heterosexual practice. However, the Bible condemns sexual perversions, being defined as any deviation from Biblical standards. "We agree 100% with your words.
There are things you should know:
- The Supreme Court, in two different offices, said the Non-Discrimination Project was unnecessary, since the rights of citizens are adequately protected by the Constitution and other legislation. Studying the Constitution and other legislation that guaranteed equality before the law for all people, it is concluded that the draft Non-Discrimination is a "tailored suit" to give a preferred position and favoritism to the homosexual movement.
- Nondiscrimination Project conflicts with the Act of Worship, which guarantees freedom of belief and religious practice. The statutes of the evangelical church are based on the Word of God and are approved by the Ministry of Justice.
- Noting Article 3, any situation could be considered discrimination and punished by law
- Nondiscrimination Project incorporates a new paragraph 1 bis, to Title III of Book II of the Penal Code which could imply that preach against "sexual orientation" of homosexuals, refuse membership in our churches until they repent and turn away from sin or not allowing them to teach our children in Sunday school can be listed as "expressions intended to promote hatred or violence"
The purpose is to punish any arbitrary discrimination. Moreover, if a congregation or evangelical minister refuses to marry such homosexuals, or if a congregation excludes from its members a parishioner who did not want to leave their conduct deemed contrary to the gospel are set to be subject to a penalty or the commission of a crime of arbitrary discrimination which would be an absurdity when viewed from the perspective of the end and purpose of Christian religious institutions. Be exposed to accusations and trials.
"Indeed we will commit acts of discrimination, condemn and our beliefs, our opinion, for preaching the word of God in public and private places, exercising our freedom of conscience and our religious beliefs?. How do you objectively distinguish incitement to hatred or not, when people living practices of their "sexual orientation", "feel" attacked not by the view of God and the gospel preached, if not by the speaker or the environment God called to denounce sin, in a free exercise to exercise their right to preach the gospel even protected by the Constitution of the Republic and the law of worship is guaranteed in practice to exercise the guarantee of freedom to manifest and exercise their beliefs and worship?
BILL:
Title I
General Provisions.Article 1 .- The provisions of this law are to prevent and eliminate all forms of discrimination exercised against any person.
ARTICLE 2 .- The State policymakers and mediate the actions necessary to ensure to all individuals without discrimination, the full, effective and equal enjoyment or exercise of their rights and freedoms.
The State may draw distinctions or preferences to promote and strengthen the recognition, enjoyment or exercise of the rights of individuals or groups of people.
Article 3 .- For purposes of this Act discrimination shall mean any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference arbitrary, by act or omission based on race, color, ethnicity, age, sex, gender, religion, creed, political or other opinion, birth, national origin, cultural or socio-economic, language or language, marital status, sexual orientation, illness, disability, genetic structure or any other status or individual.Title II
Special action discriminationArticle 4 .- Without prejudice to any special actions as appropriate, the directly affected, either by himself or his name, denounce the acts or omissions importing arbitrary discrimination that have been committed against him.
The action may implore within 30 working days since he was executed the act or omission occurred or, depending on their nature, since it has been heard or know some of them, before the Court of Appeal.
The Court may, at the request of the party concerned, to decree orders not to innovate, when the challenged act or omission would cause irreparable damage or render impossible the implementation of action taken as, should uphold the application.
5 .- After deducting the action, the court must investigate the claim and give the file a progressive course until a final decision.
The Court required to inform the person alleged to commit the act or omission and to whom it deems appropriate, notified by trade. This will have a period of ten working days to submit comments.
Draining the report, or expiration of the period within which to comment, the court bring the car on and the cause is added to the table nearest the audience, after drawing the Chamber. The Court may, if considered necessary, open a probationary term which shall not exceed seven days, and hear the arguments of the parties.
The Court shall sentence within fifteen days, since it is in pending.
A Unanimous Supreme Court rules on the other aspects necessary for the proper conduct of this action.
Article 6. Without prejudice to the preceding article, the Court of Appeals in its ruling, shall immediately take all measures it deems necessary to restore the rule of law and ensure adequate protection of the affected, and rescind the discriminatory act, or order terminate its execution.
Likewise, the Court may declare the source of compensation apply in his case, to repair the moral and material damage caused. In this case, the affected party may sue before the competent judge, the determination of compensation for the damages applicable. The amount of compensation shall be determined in brief and summary procedure.
If the sentence lays hold that the complaint is without any foundation, the Court declared that the complainant is liable for damages caused by him, which will be pursued before the civil court, in brief and summary procedure.
ARTICLE 7 .- Against the final verdict, the remedy of appeal, which must be filed within five days to the Supreme Court.
Article 8 ° .- If the Court declares that a public official in the exercise of his office or when he committed acts of arbitrary discrimination, which refers to Article 3 of this Act in respect of a person or entity, consistent in refusing the supply of goods or service for which it is entitled, shall be punished by a fine of 50-100 UTM.
If such discriminatory acts were committed in the exercise of private activities, which are provided charitable services, the manager may also be sanctioned by the fine provided in the preceding paragraph.Title III
Standard Special CriminalArticle 9 ° .- incorporated into Article 12 of the Penal Code, the following new paragraph 21:
"21 ª Committing the crime by a discriminatory motivation based on race, color, ethnicity, age, sex, gender, religion, creed, political or other opinion, birth, national origin, cultural or socio-economic, language or language, state civil, sexual orientation, illness, disability, genetic structure or any other status or individual .".".God keep Your Excellency, RICARDO LAGOS ESCOBAR
President of the Republic
LINKS
:: Tickets (somewhat) related to it:
                 |
If you liked this entry encourage to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles in your feed reader.
14 Responses to March 18 "No to the Draft Anti-Discrimination Act"
In Section 1 of the note indicates which was the opinion of the supreme court, but omit the next paragraph of office given by them: "At that time, seven ministers were of opinion favorably report the bill," considering that the initiative would be a necessary complement to the constitutional right of equality before the law and the ban imposed on him by law or any authority to establish arbitrary differences. "
Here is not in doubt or you want that homosexuals are people ignorant of their rights as they are. Furthermore the Bible teaches love of neighbor.
But we must agree that a gay person could maliciously denounce this Act, a Pastor not to marry for example. As Christians we believe in the man-woman marriage. Such situations are very ambiguous. Not accepted the suggestions made by a committee of pastors concerning these issues.
Admin
For this reason a way to level inglesi not produce such "inconvenient" is that civil marriage legally existed for non-heterosexuals, and that so they would opt for this route for a religious cause many problems in their social environment. Also, if a gay person who adheres to their beliefs then I could never marry another person of the same sex in any way be contrary to Christian marriage, then what would happen if it were to pass the civil marriage law and marry people adhering to any evangelical church or another, would it be expelled?
An evangelical Christian church, according to the Bible does not accept as members those who "practice" homosexuality. We believe in a God who is able to change what we believe is a sexual deviation (I say this respectfully).
I just wish to clarify that we are not against a law that promotes a more just society without discrimination, the proof is that pastors tried to contribute something to this law. What I advocate is that there are no legal mechanisms that make us "criminals" for preaching the gospel established by Jesus does not accept homosexuality (I do not mean the people themselves, only to homosexual practices)
Regards
Admin
"Do not slander your neighbor or look for legal means to make it disappear. "
Leviticus 19:16
"Do not take vengeance nor bear rencon against your countrymen, but rather love your neighbor as yourself, for I am Yahweh"
19:18 Levítivco
And after that ... you could give me a quote where he says that Jesus, who defnedía lepers and prostitutes, has preached against homosexuality?
I do not want the words of the preaching of the apostles, but words of Jesus himself, the "Christ."
Where to start walking? No further details are given regarding the manisfestación on MRI.
in response to verses from the Word of God used by "A. Theo "and its requirements:
John 3:16 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life.
John 3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world might be saved through him.
John 3:18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light came into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.
John 3:20 For everyone who does evil hates the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
Juan3: 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, it is apparent that his works are done in God.
Jesus also said:
Luke 17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, drank, bought, sold, they planted, they builded;
Luke 17:29 but the day Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
Luke 17:30 This is the day that the Son of man is revealed.
Does anyone think the fire and brimstone that destroyed everyone in Sodom (Jesus is saying) is an endorsement of what was happening in Sodom? ... Unfortunately I can not, by the call made and that I will respect, show other writings of the Bible that say what happened in Sodom, as I have to limit myself to use only words of Jesus, but whoever does not cover their eyes and ears can search the Word, which will light your way. I was ironic on purpose, hoping that God descauterice some consciences.
The evangelical church made a mistake in opposing the law against discrimination based on a superficial analysis justuficar writing for their actions ... a serious analysis of the text discredit any possibility of discrimination against homosexuals but is not this according to their behavior. No text Bible that condemns homosexuality as we know it ... no doubt this place would cause pain only homosexuals and the church will remain a place for hatred, prejudice and ignorance.
Dear Samuel noted in his commentary a passion to defend their ideas, but passion is not enough, it requires a careful analysis of what one believes and preaches, but otherwise one would be defending the error, 2 Peter 1:20 .
John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light came into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil.
The texts you cite do not refer to homosexuality, you apply to what you think is bad now ... The biblical texts can not be applied so liberally.
Luke 17:28 Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, drank, bought, sold, they planted, they builded;
Luke 17:29 but the day Lot left Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.
Luke 17:30 This is the day that the Son of man is revealed.
Wonder Jesus is talking about who is talking and that he does ... Jesus or anyone approve of what happened in Sodom and Gomorrah. What you should ask is: "What happened in Sodom?? And although you would be hard to believe Sodom was not destroyed by homosexuality ...
Friend you can not show other texts about what happened in Sodom, because they are not.
Excuse me for saying so but your problem (like all the evangelicals I know) is that it is reading his Bible carefully ... not all texts we can apply what we want or in our opinion
The interpretation is what the text says in the context of its production (diachrony) and in reference to its meaning and purpose (narrative and relevance).
In Leviticus 18:22 clearly states that homosexuality is an abomination. Therefore, my religion requires me to preach that homosexuality is a sin. But if the law that we discussed was approved as is, would force me to choose between disobeying the State or disobey my religion. The problem is that we choose our religion without knowing that later would declare illegal. Not fair.
They should warn us that believe and preach freely is illegal in Chile. But first we let go of the Religious Freedom and make us believe they will respect our right to choose a religion and then we leave it a crime to practice our religion as it was written, we must enter to make some changes in doctrine and now we preach: "We are all sinners, homosexuals LESS, by government mandate that have been declared holy and pure."
Our religion says we are all sinners, all, but now the law is meant to force us to preach that there is one group, ONLY ONE distinct and separate DIFFERENT KIND OF HUMAN BEING, which can not be considered among the sinners. Homosexuals as this law, have something that excludes the rest of the human race and therefore can not be preaching that they are sinners like the rest of humanity. I do not think so. I believe that homosexuals are as human and as sinful as anyone else. And no government has the right to force me to believe otherwise.
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.
And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
All things are lawful but not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. "
1 Corinthians 6:9-12
Khaki is talk about who will inherit the kingdom of God, in a context (read the whole chapter) in which the brothers of the Church of Corinth quarreled among themselves and were judged each other. The apostle tells them that no one is saying just enough to judge the other, and mentions a number of great evils that prevent (you'll be sorry) at this time entering the kingdom of God, and that some of the brothers were before (before being Christians, brothers of the Church of Corinth were inclined to such practices as homosexuality) but everything was back to accept Jesus in their lives.
Surely we can not discriminate, neither a homosexual or adulterer or prostitute, but we encourage them to find salvation in Christ Jesus.
I also agree that it would be wrong to preach on the grounds that homosexuality is a sin, commit a crime, because the Bible says we can not change or take anything that is written in the Bible.
sorry if my words bother anyone reading this comment but it is my lifestyle, Christianity is not a religion. Christ is the best example. The host to thieves, prostitutes, Pharisees, tax collectors, fishermen, etc.. but all had something in common .. a great desire to seek God in their lives and leave everything behind to walk with Christ
Greetings to all
hurting the generation of chili today then we can see that normal is abnormal and abnormal is normal
but it is true cimplimiento of the word sin is multiplied in the last days.
evangelical church should not be ecunemico perhaps the light can be coupled with darkness?
THE HIGH!
The president publicly endorses MOVILH movement pedophilia. This man, Rolando Jimenez, voted to consider pedophilia as a sexual orientation and not as a crime, supporting the proposal to give legal rights and protection of pedophiles as a group misunderstood, discriminated against and unjustly persecuted. This happened in 1994, when Jiménez MOVILH traveled as a delegate of the annual conference of the International Association of Gays and Lesbians in New York. At that time, Rolando Jimenez voted to include an organization called NAMBLA, which means NORTEAMERCANA ASSOCIATION OF LOVE BETWEEN MEN AND CHILDREN, by its initials in English. And this cake heads the organization that publishes and distributes the manual, which says it's a lie that only adults can be gay and that people are discovering their sexual identity from childhood.
WHY WANT THIS LAW?
Bitacoras.com Information ...
Rate in Bitacoras.com: On March 18, 12.00, 5 regions evangelicals claim to be heard in a peaceful way to refuse? Anti-discrimination project?, Through a public act and deliver a document in the Administration ...