Posted on 12/12/2014 7:09:11 AM PST by wagglebee
I saw this coming years ago. One of the problems is that most refuse to believe the reality of what gay activism is and where it originated. This isn’t about a friend from school or a brother who is living a gay lifestyle this is about a movement that is hedonistic to the core and which truly intends the total deconstruction of family and sexual morality.
Good comment and I fear the conjecture in your last sentence is correct.
I chose buying foreign over “Buy American” recently because my only American choices supported the homosexual agenda and other leftist causes. I felt bad afterwards, but knowing I didn’t support this makes up for it.
Africans usually obey those above them, i.e. uncles, employers, officials. So if a woman works for a man, often she feels obliged to sleep with him. Many girls and boys are routinely abused by family members or schoolmasters. No problem for girls, as long as he supports the kids, because having a kid shows she is fertile, so she often will have no trouble finding a spouse. But often for boys, this means rape and shame and rage against the one who did this (and others of his race/tribe/sexual orientation) for their entire lives.
Western colonialism often mean men worked in mines etc. in dormatories. Guess what happened there?
And of course, a lot of Europeans sent their problem sons to Africa to stop scandal. Guess what some of their problems were?
Then we have all the male rapes as punishment in jails or of enemies captured in many wars, or of school kids captured by “insurgents” and used for sex, both male and female.
Nor is any of this new: the Ugandan martyrs were killed for not renouncing Jesus and for saying no to the king’s sexual advances.
In other words, why blame one Evangelical for a few speeches? Especially since most Africans are Catholic or Anglican, not evangelical, Christians?
EXACTLY.
One of the most accurate posts I have read for some time on here.
I know the text.
But the fact that the articulated order of precedence indicates that the infliction of homosexuality upon society is punitive seems to be missed by most.
Did God hate the Frogs he sent in response to the self-worship of the Pharaohs, and the eunuchs who propped him up?
This is a 1st amendment violation of the worst possible kind. Holy hell!
>>may soon be fighting the fight on an actual battlefield.
Won’t be much of a battle if all they have to do is select who gets vaccinated - and who doesn’t.
>>Where are they on Islam and supporting terrorism?
Because the 1st and 8th amendments, among others, are an anathema to the Tzars and the eunuchs who’ve been propping them up atop their state-established pyramids.
The sheeple will eat their own entrails along with the Bill of Rights in a conditioned, fearful, and silent response.
From Article...”accusing him of “crimes against humanity” for his overseas activism opposing the homosexual agenda....
and a declaration that he violated “the laws of nations” by speaking against homosexual “rights.”
Dangerous territory ...looks like the enemy of God is making an effort to prevent Christians from interfering in his destruction of the family overseas now as mush as here....
Sadly this issue of Homosexuality is going to also split the churches, as we’ve already seen. Many are slowly, if not already adapting to permitting homosexual relations and marriages in their churches. which is something Christians cannot stand with. ....perhaps intended to be the beginings of seperating the goats from the sheep in preparation for his return?
People must wake up and focus on the health issues associated with male queer behavior. We all know that homosexual behavior is condemned in the old and new Testaments, but this will not sway secular laws. The only option is to focus on the infectious disease factor and the coprophilic behaivoir of the males.
Yes they are, but put in mind the people who let ebola infectees into the U.S. to infect Americans? These libs don’t care about much beyond their world of wealth and politics. People below their level are as cattle or garden tools, it’s no deal unless you have thousands to millions dying or rising up against you.
Not their problem, because Iran is a foreign nation that hates the so-called “evil” nation of Israel. Which leads me to ask, why doesn’t the left praise Israel for its’ liberalism?
How is it obvious which way the Supreme Court would rule? Stevens isn’t even on the Court anymore. While Ginsberg and Sotomayor’s position may be easy to figure out, there are still seven other Justices. Scalia, Thomas and Alito strike me as three solid votes against the law. Roberts is probably in that category as well. Kennedy in recent years has been more conservative, opposing expansion of state power in a number of cases. Even Bryer, a Clinton appointee, at times has been reluctant to expand power over individuals like this.
You’re right, I got Stevens’ name wrong. I was thinking of Kennedy, as well as Kagan.
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.