More hate and incivility


A small town Indiana church disappears after apparently being evicted following an incident with their marquee sign.

One who passed by and saw the sign scrambled the letters and left the message, ‘keep an open mind’.




Ok, I can see the relevance, shrug…


a sign that said “LGBTQ is a hate crime against God. Repent,”



No, they failed and slithered away…


It’s actually not hate and incivility. It’s their sincerely held religious beliefs which are Constitutionally protected. If they were persecuted based upon their religious beliefs then their Constitutional rights were violated and that’s no laughing matter.


Did they offend your sisters ? :laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing::laughing:


I could tell you about some sincerely held Muslim beliefs too…so what. They can shut their church doors and bigot away but when they put that shit out at the street in signage, they get run out of town.


It’s entirely unclear to me why allegedly bigoted views may only be expressed behind closed doors (if at all), while homosexuals and activists for so-called progressive causes are allowed to parade the streets. The way I see it, either we’re all allowed to proselytize or no one is. Unless they were trespassing, in which case it’s the owner’s prerogative to have them and their signs removed, I don’t see how they can possibly be legitimately made to leave.


Unless who was trespassing?


Members of the church. You mentioned that their signs were outside. If “outside” means on private property, then I agree that the owner has a right to have them removed. If, however, “outside” merely means on some kind of public property, then they have every right to be there. Just like a pro-LGBT group may put up pro-LGBT signs without suffering repercussions.


A church marquee would typically be on the church property. It seems that no one returned comment to the news agency, but presumably the owner of the building didn’t appreciate the incivil message that the church placed upon their marquee.


The article mentions the fact that their sign was tampered with and that its message was altered. That I find problematic, given the precedent it sets. May anyone tamper with any message they dislike, wherever they encounter it? A free society should be able to tolerate a variety of views by allowing them to be heard unobstructed.

Their message may not have been particularly kind, but preventing them from expressing their opinion isn’t exactly the pinnacle of civility, either.


Mind you that nothing was done legally. This all happened according to the market place. The community didn’t appreciate the message and the building owner didn’t either. And the church is now gone. Problem solved.


A free society isn’t going to allow discrimination.


Really? Of any kind?


Well, we would hope not…


there is no second P / no second N and there’s no K for someone to have done that. It would read “eep an o en mi d”.


Where did the “k” , the second “p” and the third “n” come from?


Not really buying the sign was the cause. To go from being in the building to completely out of the building in a matter of a couple weeks sounds like the eviction was underway before the sign was ever put up.