Imgflip Logo Icon

The only difference being that the Cities Church protestors didn't flip tables or attack anybody with whips....

The only difference being that the Cities Church protestors didn't flip tables or attack anybody with whips.... | WENT INTO A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND CONDEMNED THE PRACTICES OF THE WORSHIPPERS, WHO THEN GOT THE STATE TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK; WENT INTO A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND CONDEMNED THE PRACTICES OF THE WORSHIPPERS, WHO THEN GOT THE STATE TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK | image tagged in jesus clears the temple,cities church,jesus christ,protest,state,dirty work | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
58 views 1 upvote Made by GotTheBuzz 20 hours ago in politics
16 Comments
3 ups, 19h,
1 reply
Nah... they deprived the church goers of their Constitutional Rights...
3 ups, 19h,
1 reply
Yes, they did... the disrupted services...
3 ups, 19h,
1 reply
They had no right to disrupt the service.
3 ups, 19h,
1 reply
Nope... infringement of Constitutional Rights for others is against the law.
3 ups, 18h,
1 reply
Nope... they broke the law. PERIOD
2 ups, 18h
No they are not when they use them to infringe others of their rights...

SAN DIEGO (CN) — Multiple left-wing protesters received sentences of up to two years in jail on Friday in a novel case that pinned them as members of “antifa” that tried to stifle the speech of right-wingers in the San Diego neighborhood of Pacific Beach in 2021.

San Diego Superior Court Judge Daniel Goldstein said that the trial proved to him that antifa exists as an organization that appears to “have funding and they have an ability to make contact and morph into other things very quickly in many different jurisdictions.”

The defendants, he added, committed assault on supporters of former president Donald Trump and right-wing groups to stifle their First Amendment rights “for the benefit of antifa.”
1 up, 12h
So silly a reply.
1 up, 12h,
1 reply
Stop.
A church is private property.
Non members of the church, have no rights to interfere with members as they worship on their congregations private property. None. To state otherwise is ignorant and ludicrous.
Try as one may to justify the actions, one is totally incorrect and baseless.

The protesters may stand outside on the public sidewalk and carry a sign, .
Once they enter onto the stairs outside of the private property, they are trespassing if not compliant with the expectations of the private property owner, must leave when asked;
and are then subject to removal forcibly.

This has ZERO correlation with the Gospel account of Jesus turning the tables on the money changers. ZERO.

Don Lemon and his entourage acted like zeroes, not heroes.
0 ups, 8h
Protest is protected under the First Amendment no matter where it's happening.

The protestors weren't behaving violently, all they did was verbally rebuke the pastor and his congregation, asking that they behave like the guy they claim to worship.

Actually, it does have correlation. Jesus went into a place of worship and rebuked the worshippers there, and the Cities Church protestors were doing the same. The only difference is that Jesus got violent, flipped tables, and attacked people with a weapon while the Cities Church protestors did not.

News reporting is also protected by the Constitution.
1 up, 10h,
1 reply
Another difference is not being Jesus Christ.
0 ups, 8h
And that's relevant, how now?
Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator
EXTRA IMAGES ADDED: 1
  • Jesus clears the temple
  • image.png
  • IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
    WENT INTO A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND CONDEMNED THE PRACTICES OF THE WORSHIPPERS, WHO THEN GOT THE STATE TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK; WENT INTO A PLACE OF WORSHIP AND CONDEMNED THE PRACTICES OF THE WORSHIPPERS, WHO THEN GOT THE STATE TO DO THEIR DIRTY WORK