Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Are you an ABO like me PO'd at JR for getting called a RINO? Truce declared! Please DONATE!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2879805/posts?q=1&;page=1#1 ^ | May 6, 2012 | Seizethecarp

Posted on 05/06/2012 8:09:35 AM PDT by Seizethecarp

Attention "Anyone But Obama" (ABO) FReepers! If you go to the thread at the link you will will see that JimRob has "declared a truce" and hundreds of ABO FReepers are now vigorously defending their belief, which I share, that the ineligible Marxist Manchurian MUST BE DEFEATED to preserve the Republic...without fear of "the ZOT"! Please consider a DONATION not just to fund renewal of expression and amplification of your ABO views, but let's over-achieve this FReepathon to get JR his new equipment!

IMO, Free Republic and FReepers could be vital in swing states in rallying just enough conservatives to tip the election and prevent our troops from having to salute for even one day longer than necessary an ineligible Marxist committed to destroying the USA !


TOPICS: Breaking News; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: abo; dontate; elsiethecow; freepathon; norino; romney; truce
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,301-1,343 next last

There are a good many long-time members who are gone from this site - either of their own choosing or by expulsion. So many of them were reliable, well-reasoned posters who brought value to the forum and they helped build this place into what once was the preeminent conservative site on the web. When you engaged those people in discourse you learned something or you were given insight to a different viewpoint. And you really needed to frame your discussion accordingly, carefully. I won’t list names.

I miss that.

And then like any society I suppose, the flash mobs arrived. And discourse suffered. Remarks became more frequently hostile, judgmental and truncated. The hoodlums and gangs brought down real contributors and then danced around the corpse.

But, some of us grieved.


51 posted on 05/06/2012 9:54:14 AM PDT by Lando Lincoln (But that's just me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon; eastforker

How about a truce involving the religious bigots that inhabit this site. I am really tired of hearing the hatred spewed concerning other beliefs if different than some of these bigots. -eastforker

Here's where he came into this thread. He asked for a truce. Where is the anger in that? He expressed that he is really tired. Where is the anger in that? How is he being shrill? What exactly did he screech? What was he intending to start?

What you stated is inaccurate, in fact, it really could not be farther from the truth. He seems calm and well reasoned to me, and what he cited exists here bigtime.

52 posted on 05/06/2012 9:54:29 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Are you an ABO like me PO'd at JR for getting called a RINO?

I'm more of a WTU myself, LZ'd at TY for being called a YUKI.

53 posted on 05/06/2012 9:55:01 AM PDT by Lazamataz (To the wall, street occupiers!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

A wholly sensible position. Kennedy had to deal with the same anti-Catholic bigotry.


54 posted on 05/06/2012 9:55:32 AM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:arab spring,banks,big oil,bush,ceos,christians,coal,FNC,Jpn tsumani,T Party,wall st,you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

NUTS!

Bump for funding.


55 posted on 05/06/2012 9:55:41 AM PDT by right way right (What's it gonna take?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
"There are some people, like millions of Jews, who might say the same thing about Jesus."

Is that part of your plan to ban bashing of all religions, LOL?

56 posted on 05/06/2012 9:56:03 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: AnTiw1

Great.

Who cares?

Woulda been swell if someone else won, but they didn’t, so yeah.


57 posted on 05/06/2012 9:57:17 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack

IMHO, Islam isn’t a religion but more of a political asperation. Just like the KKK being a religious group, it was more political than religious.


58 posted on 05/06/2012 9:58:21 AM PDT by eastforker (Don't be ornery for Romney, instead Root for Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
"Excuse me sir. Seeing as how the VP is such a VIP, shouldn't we keep the PC on the QT, because if it leaks to the VC, you could end up an MIA, and then we'd all be put on KP."--Good Morning, Vietnam
59 posted on 05/06/2012 9:58:53 AM PDT by Future Snake Eater (CrossFit.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
"It is the bigot that has a closed mind. They are the ones that don’t understand when someone else has a different perspective. Oh, and the holier than though attitude. Thats simple, If you don’t believe the same way I do you are gonna burn in hell, and then go on to quote some part of scripture to again reinforce what they just said."

Well,let's be clear, it has nothing to do what with I believe or anyone else.....it all depends upon what God says.

But that said, one of the basic principles of Christianity is that Jesus Christ is the only way to eternal life, and that other faiths, which say different, are, by definition, not true. If one is a Christian, one believes in Christian principles, necessarily. You aren't willing to allow that, or entertain it, and you would have Christians behave as non-Christians just to satisfy YOU. So yes, your mind is closed, and in particular to Christian doctrine.

60 posted on 05/06/2012 10:01:20 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: chris37; Lazamataz
One more thing:

My mother, who is the wisest woman on earth of course (hehe) has given me one piece of advice that I think is relevant here: You can't control how other people feel and/or behave, but you CAN control how YOU act.

Is it hard to suck up constant criticsm if not outright bigotry against the faith you love (whatever that is?) Of course it is. Is one's natural reaction to be hurt by such? Again, of course. But as Lazamataz pointed out on his "Good Riddence" thread a few days ago: "You are not your emotions. It’s a fact you have emotions, but your emotions are not facts. " Wise advice.

I would say, "Your emotions are part of you, but you are not defined by your emotions". That's a tough pill to swallow sometimes, but it's vital to always try to live by it, or we all fall into the same trap of liberalism: Governed by our emotions, instead of using them to our advantage.

61 posted on 05/06/2012 10:02:58 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: chris37

Oh, don’t hand me that bull. He came on here yelling about bigots.


62 posted on 05/06/2012 10:03:14 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
There are a good many long-time members who are gone from this site - either of their own choosing or by expulsion. So many of them were reliable, well-reasoned posters who brought value to the forum and they helped build this place into what once was the preeminent conservative site on the web. When you engaged those people in discourse you learned something or you were given insight to a different viewpoint. And you really needed to frame your discussion accordingly, carefully. I won’t list names.

I know. Thank you. I know I'm your favorite poster. It's because I've earned it.

I am so great.

63 posted on 05/06/2012 10:03:52 AM PDT by Lazamataz (To the wall, street occupiers!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: citizen; Jim Robinson; mojitojoe
Woo-Hoo!!!

$100 for Jim Rob's equipment fund! Way to go FReeper “citizen”.

Maybe this thread wasn't such a bad idea after-all...(despite the resumption of the religious flame war).

I hope that all on this thread will take Jim Rob's direction to observe a TRUCE and take a moment to consider making a special equipment fund DONATION, as well.

64 posted on 05/06/2012 10:04:34 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

Why do you choose to post my remark out of context. I was comparing a remark to someone who called J. Smith a conman, I merely stated the above remark.


65 posted on 05/06/2012 10:04:56 AM PDT by eastforker (Don't be ornery for Romney, instead Root for Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

BTW, your request is getting drowned out, but I guess you knew this would get interesting. Thanks for reminding us to donate. We can squall like cats and still love this site!


66 posted on 05/06/2012 10:05:22 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chris37
In 2006 the Democrats demonstrated that LGBT softness will lose Republicans elections every single time it's tried. We cannot afford to have those ol'boys in the party administration, the cabinet, the Senate, the House, in Governorships, or any position of power or authority.

The Democrats easily turn the public to vote AGAINST US in those cases ~ they have NO tolerance whatsoever for gays in our ranks. Democrats are different. The public seems to expect them to be sexual perverts.

I"m not sure how a politician who'd participated in activities that advanced the cause of the LGBT movement might purge himself or herself of the offense ~ it is a dilemma, but one I fear that will be resolved in an election where we lose.

It's up to the potential candidates to judge for themselves if we won't I suppose ~ and it's not too late for that.

67 posted on 05/06/2012 10:07:39 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
Oh, don’t hand me that bull.

I have no idea why I'm sending you this picture.


68 posted on 05/06/2012 10:09:59 AM PDT by Lazamataz (To the wall, street occupiers!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
Hold on there.

Hardly anyone has been totally banned. They were told to shut up on certain topics (Treyvon, pro-Romney, etc.) and they did. I've seen all those people posting on other stuff.

69 posted on 05/06/2012 10:11:01 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon

Not at all, If what you believe is right for you, thats wonderful that YOU have that faith as a comfort. But there are no absolutes when it comes to religion because frankly, it is not logical, so in honesty, it can not be debated, logicaly. Religion is a belief, and no two people are gonna belive exactly the same thing that is based soley on faith.


70 posted on 05/06/2012 10:12:07 AM PDT by eastforker (Don't be ornery for Romney, instead Root for Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

LOL!!!!!!!

I don’t know why, but your posts always make me LOL. (except for the ones like I referenced above ;) )

Keep up the good work please; you make political “discussion” almost palatable. haha Myself, I gotta pull the eject lever; I have to go and get some weed killer at Lowe’s.


71 posted on 05/06/2012 10:12:36 AM PDT by FourtySeven (47)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

Eastforker, you’’re too predictable, dude.

You know what? Seizethecarp is right-—his thread is getting hijacked. There’ll be other threads, NO DOUBT. ;)

DONATE!


72 posted on 05/06/2012 10:12:42 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: FourtySeven

Fair enough.

I have personally been called a satanist on this website for describing my belief system.

I didn’t really appreciate that **** a whole lot.

And I know there won’t be any stopping it, because that’s how people are.


73 posted on 05/06/2012 10:13:30 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

ROTFL

I wish I had some idea of that pic’s context, but I just....cannot.....make it....


74 posted on 05/06/2012 10:14:23 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

Romney Republican revisionist history. One of the more blatant, twisted versions of it I’ve seen.


75 posted on 05/06/2012 10:16:38 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Act in faith, not out of fear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon; eastforker

I showed you exactly what he came on here saying.

Your mischaracterization of his statement is ASTONISHING.

Maybe the yelling you heard is in your own head.


76 posted on 05/06/2012 10:18:14 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: EternalVigilance

Go look it up EV.


77 posted on 05/06/2012 10:20:02 AM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; citizen

Thank you very much, Seizethecarp and citizen!!


78 posted on 05/06/2012 10:20:11 AM PDT by Jim Robinson (Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Listen, you know I’ve got to be honest and tell you that I do not support gays at all, and I do not support people who support gays.

Sadly, I like many others find myself between a rock and a hard place in this election. It sucks, I hate it.

The fact of the matter is the GOP won, we lost, and I do not intentd to compound that loss by allowing Obama to be re-elected. I simply can’t do that. He must go. Romney comes after that, and so does the GOP.

Choosing to fight the right battle at the wrong time can be a fatal mistake. Obama is public enemy #1.


79 posted on 05/06/2012 10:24:04 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: citizen
Which brings up the fact folks are using the term "bigotry' in an entirely inappropriate way.

All the definitions agree that it has to do with an "attitude or belief that one's own opinions, however irrational or ignant, are superior to the other irrational and ignant opinions ofothers".

When it comes to "religion", they are all pretty formal, and the believers hold to "truths" derived from long term observations or revelations.

Religious truths, to any believer of whatever religion, are NOT irrational, nor ignant, nor are they mere opinions.

When you accuse religious believers, of any kind, of being bigots you are attacking a body of truths ~ and the normal human reaction to that is going to be much more violent and assertive than you would get for simply criticizing their opinions, irrational or ignant as they may be.

We don't need a "be kind to' Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, Anabaptists, Buddhists, Hindus, Tao, or snakehandling approach ~ something more like total avoidance of the incorrect term 'bigot" or its derivatives would probably be OK.

If a specific practice of the "other' is particularly noisome to you maybe you should go after it. The people who think you can command God with a word don't like Mormon post mortem baptism ~ and they've gone after the Mormon's on that point. I've gone after the "command God' folks on that point ~ but with a reason.

Simply accusing them of mindless evil bigotry just wouldn't get to the point because otherwise we like the way the Mormons cut their lawns, and the "command God' folks park in their driveways and keep the kids in.

I think we could all keep our fingers off the trigger words in any religious discussion simply by remembering the 'other guys' (or for any of you mind-numbed, knee-jerk, robot-like leftwingtards reading this) ~ 'other' ~ probably don't think their religious beliefs are mere opinions, and they'll fight you on that point alone before you get to the meat of the argument.

80 posted on 05/06/2012 10:26:10 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: chris37
When it comes to the gay issue, we lose if it exists. The Democrats make sure of that. 2006 we lost our shirt over it. Fighting or not fighting isn't the game ~ if it exists we lose. If it doesn't exist we may win.

We might be able to win this one at the staff level ~ just have all of them named, purged and chased away. I'm sure Priebus can do that already.

81 posted on 05/06/2012 10:29:28 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
Go look it up EV.

I've been involved in all of it since it happened.

Your version of events just doesn't square with reality.

82 posted on 05/06/2012 10:33:29 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Act in faith, not out of fear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: AnTiw1

Name one single candidate for office that is running on discrimination against gays (or any other group).

Why are your panties in a wad over Romney’s comments?

Could it be you are just a member of the fifth column, here to sow discord?


83 posted on 05/06/2012 10:33:43 AM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Maybe I should use the phrase, Religious absolutist. Absolutely their way or the hiway....to hell.


84 posted on 05/06/2012 10:34:18 AM PDT by eastforker (Don't be ornery for Romney, instead Root for Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

The conservatives I know have no problem with tolerance of gays.

Its the in your face demand for acceptance and, indeed, promotion of their lifestyles they are sick of. That’s where the GOP and Dems part company. The GOP has steadfastly opposed gay marriage and indoctrination of LGBT in schools, etc. From what I’ve seen, most Dems set homos as the ideal.

Republicans are the clearly better choice when it comes to the question of homosexuality in our society. I would prefer it went completely back in the closet, but that doesn’t look like it will happen.


85 posted on 05/06/2012 10:40:39 AM PDT by A.Hun (Common sense is no longer common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-politics/santorum-is-right-romney-is-still-wrong/

...Dr. Herb Titus was the founding dean of the School of Public Policy at Regent University, and later served as the founding dean of Regent Law School. Before that he studied under Dr. Francis Schaeffer, and graduated from Harvard Law School. Titus has worked with the U.S. Justice Department, and is admitted to practice before the U.S. Supreme Court. His book God, Man, and Law is a must-read for anyone interested in preserving the rule of law for the next generation.

I contacted Dr. Titus on Friday morning for his response to the Santorum-Romney exchange. He replied back with the following:

“Rick Santorum challenged Mitt Romney to justify the former Massachusetts Governor’s decision to implement the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts ruling that declared that the exclusion of otherwise qualified same-sex couples from civil marriage violated the state constitution.

After the debate, Mr. Romney stated to Mr. Santorum that he did all that he legally could to stop the implementation of the court’s decision before he exercised his duty as Governor to enforce the court’s decision requiring local officials to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. He issued a challenge to Mr. Santorum to find any qualified legal authority that would not agree with him. I have been asked to meet that challenge.

I am a graduate of the Harvard Law School. I am an active member of the Virginia bar and the bar of a number of federal courts, including the United States Supreme Court. As a professor of constitutional law for nearly 30 years in four different ABA-approved law schools, and as a practicing lawyer, I have written a number of scholarly articles and legal briefs on a variety of constitutional subjects; including the nature of legislative, executive and judicial powers and the constitutional separation of those powers.

I am generally familiar with the Massachusetts Constitution, and especially familiar with that constitution’s provision dictating that no department shall exercise the powers that belong to either of the other two departments “to the end it may be a government of laws and not of men.”

As Governor, Mr. Romney has claimed that he had no choice but to obey the Supreme Judicial Court’s opinion. This claim is false for several reasons.

First, Mr. Romney was not a party to the case. Only parties to a case are bound to obey a court order. As President Abraham Lincoln said in support of his refusal to enforce the United States Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott case – the nation’s policy regarding slavery was not determined by a court opinion, even by the highest court of the land. Likewise, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ policy regarding marriage may not be determined by the Supreme Judicial Court, the State’s highest court.

Second, the Supreme Judicial Court did not order any party to do anything. Rather, it issued only a declaration that, in its opinion, excluding otherwise qualified same-sex couples access to civil marriage was unconstitutional. Thus, even the Massachusetts Department of Health, which was a party to the case, was not ordered to do anything.

Third, the Massachusetts Board of Health was not authorized by statute to issue marriage licenses. That was a job for Justices of the Peace and town clerks. The only task assigned by the Legislature to the Board of Health was to record the marriage license; it had no power to issue them even to heterosexual couples. So the Department of Health, the only defendant in the case, could not legally have complied with an order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Fourth, if the court were to order the Department of Health to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, then Mr. Romney’s duty as governor would have been to instruct the Department that it had no authority to do what the court ordered. Nor could the court confer such authority, such an authorization being in nature a legislative, not a judicial, act.

Fifth, the decision whether to implement the Supreme Judicial Court’s opinion was, as the court itself acknowledged, for “the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of [the court’s] opinion.” By the very terms of the order, the Massachusetts legislature had discretion to do nothing.

Sixth, because the legislature did nothing, Mr. Romney had no power to act to implement the court decision. By ordering justices of the peace, town clerks, and other officials authorized to issue marriage licenses to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Mr. Romney unconstitutionally usurped legislative power, a power denied him by the Massachusetts constitution that separated the three kinds of powers into three different departments.

A 2007 article from World Net Daily quotes a slew of respected legal minds in criticizing Romney for his role in destroying marriage in Massachusetts, including Phyllis Schlafly.

“Romney said we had to follow the law but what law,” Schlafly is quoted as asking in the article. “There is no law that requires or even allows same-sex marriages (in Massachusetts).”

Finally, there is this 2006 letter sent to Romney as he was departing as governor by a long list of conservative activists from around the country. It includes signers like Paul Weyrich, one of the Founding Fathers of the conservative movement, and Robert Knight, one of the original drafters of the Defense of Marriage Act signed into law by then-President Clinton. The letter also reinforces the claims made by Santorum about what Romney did to marriage in Massachusetts.

Just days after giving a speech touting his conservative credentials at the 2011 Values Voters Summit, Romney told a New Hampshire audience in October that he is a supporter of civil unions, which is really just so-called homosexual marriage by another name.

Yet again Romney is found to be playing fast and loose with the truth. Voters should be thanking Santorum for calling him on it.


86 posted on 05/06/2012 10:41:35 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Act in faith, not out of fear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Just curious, will the banned Romney supporters be reinstated?


87 posted on 05/06/2012 10:43:39 AM PDT by Hot Tabasco (My 6 pack abs are now a full keg......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
'religious absolutist" really doesn't convey anything meaningful but it could be misconstrued as "bigot" ~ so, for a better example let's have a go at BAPTISM where there may be a legitimate fear of drowning babies. Have you looked up the statistics on the number of babies that drown each year in Eastern Orthodox churches? I have. There are real news stories.

My own church delays baptism until the age of understanding. Roman Catholics use sprinkling ~ although they'll use the other kinds, but believe you me, I didn't know babies were drowning in baptism.

Maybe Rome is right; maybe we are right; maybe God will know His own is enough thought on the matter to satisfy demands to continue a practice where a baby can and does drown. I don't know, but that's a specific behavior that causes me concern ~ but the belief in the background is that Baptism is the First Sacrament!

A debate over baptism must certainly avoid the term "bigot' ~ or "religious absolutist" ~ or no resolution is possible.

Enough on baptism. We should be able to handle real disputes about behavior without condemning the entire body of truths that guide the other guy. (SEE: Amnesty from Oblivion)

88 posted on 05/06/2012 10:44:22 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

It appears that Mitt and Obama have essentially the same agendas, but I should vote for Mitt because he’s the GOP candidate?

I don’t think so.


89 posted on 05/06/2012 10:46:26 AM PDT by Third Person
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
Well, whatever, but 2006 demonstrated that if you got a guy visiting public toilets for sex, and another guy hanging around kids, and another guy running the RNC, the PUBLIC WON"T VOTE FOR US!

We simply cannot afford to have those guys around. Take their money. Accept their votes, but they have to stay out of party matters and public office. Else we cannot win elections, which is all these campaigns are about.

90 posted on 05/06/2012 10:47:26 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun

Here’s the more succinct version:


As Governor, Mr. Romney has claimed that he had no choice but to obey the Supreme Judicial Court’s opinion. This claim is false for several reasons.

First, Mr. Romney was not a party to the case. Only parties to a case are bound to obey a court order. As President Abraham Lincoln said in support of his refusal to enforce the United States Supreme Court’s infamous Dred Scott case – the nation’s policy regarding slavery was not determined by a court opinion, even by the highest court of the land. Likewise, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’ policy regarding marriage may not be determined by the Supreme Judicial Court, the State’s highest court.

Second, the Supreme Judicial Court did not order any party to do anything. Rather, it issued only a declaration that, in its opinion, excluding otherwise qualified same-sex couples access to civil marriage was unconstitutional. Thus, even the Massachusetts Department of Health, which was a party to the case, was not ordered to do anything.

Third, the Massachusetts Board of Health was not authorized by statute to issue marriage licenses. That was a job for Justices of the Peace and town clerks. The only task assigned by the Legislature to the Board of Health was to record the marriage license; it had no power to issue them even to heterosexual couples. So the Department of Health, the only defendant in the case, could not legally have complied with an order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Fourth, if the court were to order the Department of Health to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, then Mr. Romney’s duty as governor would have been to instruct the Department that it had no authority to do what the court ordered. Nor could the court confer such authority, such an authorization being in nature a legislative, not a judicial, act.

Fifth, the decision whether to implement the Supreme Judicial Court’s opinion was, as the court itself acknowledged, for “the Legislature to take such action as it may deem appropriate in light of [the court’s] opinion.” By the very terms of the order, the Massachusetts legislature had discretion to do nothing.

Sixth, because the legislature did nothing, Mr. Romney had no power to act to implement the court decision. By ordering justices of the peace, town clerks, and other officials authorized to issue marriage licenses to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, Mr. Romney unconstitutionally usurped legislative power, a power denied him by the Massachusetts constitution that separated the three kinds of powers into three different departments.

— Herb Titus

http://stevedeace.com/news/iowa-politics/santorum-is-right-romney-is-still-wrong/


91 posted on 05/06/2012 10:47:26 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Act in faith, not out of fear.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
Viewing the imaqe information doesb't help much:
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/0qUoAgM0xz0/hqdefault.jpg

To me, he looks like an updated Michael York from the Three Musketeers (1973)

92 posted on 05/06/2012 10:51:51 AM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:arab spring,banks,big oil,bush,ceos,christians,coal,FNC,Jpn tsumani,T Party,wall st,you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
< popcorn >
93 posted on 05/06/2012 10:52:28 AM PDT by tomkat ( FU.baraq <font finger=middle>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Here on FR, Have you seen any anti-christian threads started by any other religion? Any athiest starting any anti religion threads? I haven’t but I have seen numerous anti-mormon and anti-catholic threads.The ant mormon threads are started for only one purpose, that is to trash it. And no, I am not mormon, just sick and tired of people starting a thread for no other reason but to trash some one elses belief system.


94 posted on 05/06/2012 10:53:06 AM PDT by eastforker (Don't be ornery for Romney, instead Root for Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: A.Hun
"Could it be you are just a member of the fifth column, here to sow discord?"

Oh yeah, that's it. And absolutely anyone doing anything other than the RINO plan is a vote for obama, don't forget to add that.

I held this back, but you deserve it:

Brokeback Romney...non-bots might get a laugh out of it.

95 posted on 05/06/2012 10:54:18 AM PDT by AnTiw1 (Men who stand firm against an army of thousands, run when a tiger appears among them. ~ShirKhan~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: CatherineofAragon
“Thanks for reminding us to donate. We can squall like cats and still love this site!”

Speaking of cats, I have a love of cats that is admittedly embarrassing for a male. Free Republic has some of the greatest kitty links from around the world interspersed with the other fabulous postings. FReeper posters provide such wide variety of stories from finance to science to archeology that I am on FR for most of the day every day.

That is why I was determined to maintain my monthly DONATION even when an ABO stance could not be posted for a short period of time. Now with the TRUCE I can be unconflicted about continuing to DONATE to FR!

96 posted on 05/06/2012 11:00:15 AM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: citizen

Yep....I can see that resemblance.

I also see a bit of Austin Powers, LOL.


97 posted on 05/06/2012 11:01:45 AM PDT by CatherineofAragon (Time for a write-in campaign...Darryl Dixon for President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: eastforker
Sure, I've seen anti-Christian threads started by members of other religions where the target was other than the RCs.

Some of it is pretty subtle so you'd have to know more about their own religious beliefs to figure it out. An insult really can go under the radar and nobody will notice.

Most likely your idea of a religious attack is different than mine though. I count Jains, Hindus, Moslems, Buddhists, RCs, Orthodox and Jews of all kinds ~ as well as Christians of all kinds ~among my own personal friendship circles, and to a degree, marriage and blood ties.

There's ways to get along. The first one is always assume that the guy making the attack may not know everything he needs to know about the target. The second is always assume the guy being attacked knows enough to not dwell on inanities and misconceptions regarding his own or the other guys religion.

I'll never forget when my cousin reminded me the Nazarenes had abolished their dress code and were now pretty much the same as Methodists. Now that was an embarrassment. I'm sure there are a million stories like that.

Did you realize the etiquette with burning candles inside religious buildings is pretty much the same with all religious groups? There's a sound reason for that!

98 posted on 05/06/2012 11:03:05 AM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Jim Robinson; Seizethecarp

The thanks goes to you, good sirs!


99 posted on 05/06/2012 11:04:56 AM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:arab spring,banks,big oil,bush,ceos,christians,coal,FNC,Jpn tsumani,T Party,wall st,you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

I can’t donate a lot, but I donated on my last payday and intend to again on my next payday since this FReepathon is going a bit long.


100 posted on 05/06/2012 11:05:25 AM PDT by My hearts in London - Everett (Gingrich or bust!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 1,301-1,343 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson