To: William McKinley
Interesting development.
2 posted on
03/11/2004 3:02:06 PM PST by
Neets
(“I now know Him in a more personal way that I have. It is as it was " Jim Caviezel)
To: William McKinley
Breaking news on CNN CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT BANS gay Marriage!!!!!
4 posted on
03/11/2004 3:05:46 PM PST by
stopem
To: William McKinley
Good!
5 posted on
03/11/2004 3:06:27 PM PST by
k2blader
(Some folks should worry less about how conservatives vote and more about how to advance conservatism)
To: William McKinley
I understand that this is partly due to a strategic move by some pro-gay marriage legislators who voted for it in order to suspend debate on the issue until that last critical vote of the constitution, where they'll drop their support and kill the ban. Any truth to that?
12 posted on
03/11/2004 3:40:37 PM PST by
Kahonek
To: William McKinley
But it will still be 2006 before it is voted on I think. In the meantime marriages will take place. What they really need to do is impeach 4 justices.
19 posted on
03/11/2004 4:10:08 PM PST by
King Black Robe
(With freedom of religion and speech now abridged, it is time to go after the press.)
To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping -
The same theme song - starting with Nyah Nyah Nyah Nyah NYAAH Nyah.... ;-))))
If anyone wants on/off this ping list, you know what to do.
26 posted on
03/11/2004 4:28:23 PM PST by
little jeremiah
(...men of intemperate minds can not be free. Their passions forge their fetters.)
To: William McKinley
Legislators telling nine black robes where to stick it would make a welcome trend.
31 posted on
03/12/2004 6:47:38 AM PST by
Carry_Okie
(The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
To: William McKinley
This is so far from being over.. It's a pity they're gonna force civil unions onto the people as well.
Interesting site here:
http://www.liberty-ca.org/ "A domestic partnership has no civil purpose, for it can be nothing more than a recognition that two people love each other and may be in a deviant (non-procreative) sexual relationship. Neither an acknowledgement of love or deviant sexual activity has a valid governmental purpose in a secular society.
Citizens should not be encouraged with tax incentives by the government to engage in deviant sexual activity, which may bring about disease and community degradation."
40 posted on
03/12/2004 3:34:57 PM PST by
Trillian
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson