Gay marriage, abortion among social issues on legislative agenda

The Daily Press ^ | December 30, 2004 | KRISTEN GELINEAU

[Ed Current]

RICHMOND, Va. -- Same-sex marriage is back on the General Assembly's agenda, as Republicans attempt to strengthen what some legal experts already consider the most restrictive anti-gay law in the nation. Democrats say they'll fight to repeal it.

"The Supreme Court better get the message that average Americans just don't connect with same sex marriage," Marshall said.

"These are children who are quite well developed," Black said. "And we're simply saying that if they have to be killed, then let's at least be sufficiently merciful to spare them from this excruciating pain that they suffer."

[Ed Current]

The federal courts have become the law breaking branch of the federal government. Congress can remove appelate jurisdiction of the USSC and jurisdiction of lower federal courts We the People Act(HR 3893 IH) and leave these issues with Virginia and every other state.

Article III, Section 2 - The Washington Times: Editorials/OP-ED In the 107th Congress (2001-2002), Congress used the authority of Article III, Section 2, clause 2 on 12 occasions to limit the jurisdiction of the federal courts.

• Justice Brennan said in 1982: "[O]bviously we Americans must accept that . . . upon judges, and particularly justices of the Supreme Court, rests a great share of the delicate responsibility of deciding what must be preserved and what must be changed, what we shall protect and what we shall abandon."- William Brennan, Address at Park School, Baltimore, Maryland (Nov. 21, 1982)
• Most members of the Court seem to be gnostics, firmly believing they have access to wisdom denied the rest of us" (i.e., those citizens who are not justices on the Supreme Court). The question arises as Justice Antonin Scalia has said: "What secret knowledge, one must wonder, is breathed into lawyers when they become Justices of this Court? . . . Day by day, case by case, [the Court] is busy designing a Constitution for a country I do not recognize." - Robert Bork, Our Judicial Oligarchy , First Things , Nov. 1996, at 21.
• The People's Constitution is no longer the "supreme law of the land" binding upon the judges, as well as the people. - Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).
• Even Justice William O. Douglas admitted late in his career that "due process, to use the vernacular, is the wildcard that can be put to such use as the judges choose." William O. Douglas, quoted in W. Forrester, Are We Ready for Truth in Judging? 63 A.B.A. J. 1212 (1977)

1. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to break as many laws as they have, why does the Constitution prohibit them from being involved in the law making process? Why did Marshall have to derive the doctrine of judicial review? Why wasn't it explicitly stated in the Constitution?
2. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to amend the Constition, why does the Constitution prohibit them from being involved in the amendment process?
3. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to enforce their own opinion, why does the Constitution leave that option with the President?
4. If the U.S. Supreme Court was intended to be equal to or above the written Constition, why does the Constitution state, "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land…. and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution."

• The Avalon Project : Federalist No 78 The judiciary, on the contrary, has no influence over either the sword or the purse; no direction either of the strength or of the wealth of the society; and can take no active resolution whatever. It may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm even for the efficacy of its judgments. It proves incontestably, that the judiciary is beyond comparison the weakest of the three departments of power 1 The celebrated Montesquieu, speaking of them, says: "Of the three powers above mentioned, the judiciary is next to nothing.'' "Montesquieu: The Spirit of Laws.'' vol. i., page 186.

[DirtyHarryY2K]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

"The germ of destruction of our nation is in the power of the judiciary, an irresponsible body — working like gravity by night and by day, gaining a little today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiseless step like a thief over the field of jurisdication, until all shall render powerless the checks of one branch over the other and will become as venal and oppressive as the government from which we separated."
--Thomas Jefferson (1821)

If you want on/off the list let me know.

[StonyBurk]

My Prayers are with the good people of VA.(and with true
Americans everywhere) If we surrender to those who would impose "GayRights" and the "civilRights"agenda of the
ACLU we will be most miserable indeed. I fear,from reaidng the news, we are suffering the effects brought about by our own neglect. Keep being drawn to George Mason 1787
As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world
so they must be in this .By inevitible chain of causes and effects Providence punishes national sins with naitonal calamities." HE spoke of the national sin of the African
slave trade.I can think of no greater national sin -that neglect of the foundations of this "Christian nation.'

[Lindykim]

Gnostic activist jurists don't believe in our traditional Rule of Law, which to their way of thinking, are a set of laws that express the moral code of an oppressive, repressive, non-existant Creator from whom the gnostics are liberating humankind.


These gnostics doubtless see themselves as modernitys' Oracles of Delphi...... the 'chosen ones' who for some unknown reason, are intellectually superior to the masses and therefore the 'fount of all wisdom"......in other words, "the truth, the way, and the light." The 'annointed' ones see themselves as leading mankind out of bondage.

[Ed Current]

As nations cannot be rewarded or punished in the next world so they must be in this .By inevitible chain of causes and effects Providence punishes national sins with naitonal calamities."

Abortion as "Shedding Innocent Blood" & Lessons Toward Repentance ...

Abortion is Shedding of Innocent Blood. Abortion is the shedding of innocent blood. The blood of an unborn child is separate from that of its mother at 21days gestation and is a person from conception (Luke 1:42-43). As you know, killing such a child violates God's laws in the Decalogue (Exodus 20:13). God hates such killing (Proverbs 6:16-17) and it defiles the land (Numbers35:33). God is personally pledged to avenge the shedding of innocent blood (Deuteronomy 32:43).

National Responsibility and Judgment. For shedding of innocent blood in Israel God brought a series of escalating judgments culminating in the Babylonian captivity in 586 B.C. (Psalm 106:36-43; Jeremiah 33:35,36) and, according to Jesus (Matthew 23:34,35; Luke 11:49-51), the life for life judgment and total destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. To the idolatry of Israel involving child sacrifice to Baal and Molech in exchange for material wealth and to celebrate sexual promiscuity, we have added an idol of convenience. As it did in the slavery debate, the nation not only permits the individual to commit an abortion in sin, it affords Constitutional protection and the full force of federal and state government to protect the activity-and in many instances taxpayer funds to pay for it.

Individual, Corporate, and Leadership Responsibility. Each person responsible for an abortion is under a life for life judgment (Genesis 9:6; Numbers 35:31) and their entire family falls under judgment as well (Leviticus 20:4,5). There is also a collective responsibility that each person has for all abortions. The answer to Cain's question,"Am I my brother's keeper?" is found in Genesis 9:5: "And from each man will I demand an accounting for the life of his fellow man." In God's judgment of Israel in 586 B.C., He held responsible the national leaders (Zephaniah 1:7,8), the prophets and priests (Lamentations 3:12,13), elders (Ezekiel 9:4-6), and complacent men (Zephaniah 1:12).

The Declaration of Independence is an Instrument of Judgment. The "Equal Creation" principles in the Declaration of Independence were the cry of the anti-slavery crusade for 30 years. Today most evangelical leaders and many presidential candidates reference the same document and the Creator's "endowment of unalienable rights" in the fight against big government and abortion rights. What they fail to mention is that this document is also an instrument of judgment. They overlook its "execution" provisions. In its first paragraph, the very existence of the nation is pinned to the "laws of nature and nature's God." For Jefferson's contemporaries, this phrase meant the Romans 2:15 law written on every man's heart, whether Christian or not, as tested by the Christian Bible. After a detailed list of the sins of the government of King George III by implication in violation of these laws, the document declares that " all political connection between [the colonial states] and the state of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved." In Matthew 7:1, Jesus tells us that in the same manner and measure that we judge others, we will receive judgment ourselves. Judgment upon America in the same manner and measure mandates a dissolution - the natural consequence of violating God's laws on which her formation was premised.

Unlike any other sin, God is personally pledged to avenge the shedding of innocent blood. If we are to avoid judgment, the following are some suggestions for the course of repentance on this issue:

[Ed Current]

Gnostic activist jurists don't believe in our traditional Rule of Law,

The believe in the rule of broken law and their need to have their lying jaws broken by impeachment/removal &/or jurisdiction removed.

[gobucks]

More on lying jaws: ....


"Margaret Whipple is hoping the third time's a charm for her bill that would prevent contraception from being subject to or governed by abortion laws.

The bill, defeated two years ago and carried over from last session, is necessary to protect contraceptive methods such as the morning after pill, Whipple said.

"There are people whose belief is--unscientific as it may be _ that you have a pregnancy prior to a fertilized egg being in the wall of the uterus," Whipple said. "If you don't have a pregnancy, you don't have abortion."

So, a fertilized egg is no different, really, than a hang nail as far as Whipple is concerned.

Her Dad must have badly mistreated her for this kind of mental nonsense to take root, and then flowing into words from her mouth ... lies of the highest order.

[Ed Current]

Her Dad must have badly mistreated her for this kind of mental nonsense to take root, and then flowing into words from her mouth ... lies of the highest order.

Some folk have confessed that psychological/emotional disturbance precluded their acceptance of the truth. Their denial deceived emotionally balanced folk into believing a lie.

• A somewhat recent Time/CNN poll found that 65 percent of Americans know that life begins at conception.
  

So, the facts are slowly seeping into the cranial crevices of the public, but for many like Whipple, the facts and majority adherence to them are meaningless.

[Paul C. Jesup]

So you guys support the government going into other people's bedrooms as long as it is not your on bedroom, this is not being conservative (supporting less government regulations) that is being a 'statist', supporting more govenment regulations.

Now hear me out guys, I really think that if you want to destroy the democratic party, you should layoff the anti-homosexuality regulations and instead focus on anti-abortion efforts because then we could literally say that the only thing the Democrats support is DEATH!!

[Ed Current]

So you guys support the government going into other people's bedrooms as long as it is not your on bedroom, this is not being conservative (supporting less government regulations) that is being a 'statist', supporting more govenment regulations.

There is no right to commit sodomy!

Amendment VIII: Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes ...

Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1310597/posts

• Chemical castration of a man with AIDS convicted of sexually assaulting a 4-year-old boy at Lake Tahoe has been upheld by a state court.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least.

How you can compare two consenting adults to rapists is beyond me, you're as insane as the feminists who say 'all men are rapists.'

Chemical castration of a man with AIDS convicted of sexually assaulting a 4-year-old boy at Lake Tahoe has been upheld by a state court.

And what do this have to do with anything.

[StonyBurk]

From what I've seen that is precisely what the Jacki Party
of Deception and Divisions does support-- DEATH. They support strict gun control laws that protect the criminal
and do not make society safer. They support every immoral
anti-Christian position known to man. Geeze you are so Right the Only thing they support is Death.Either by what
the reprobates heap unto themselves ,and the nation--or by
the shedding of innocent blood via the abortion industry.
Or by being unarmed and unprotected in a godless(secular)
society not governed by God but by tyrants.

[StonyBurk]

NEVER met anyone decieved by that evil /corrupt lifestyle of death who EVER entered into that lifestyle as a consenting adult. They are introduced when under duress,
or under the influence of mind altering drugs.But only
a FOOL/or an evil one--would claim this CRAP about "consenting adults"It is a LIE from HELL/

[Paul C. Jesup]

Thank you. I am glad someone sees the logic in my statments and tactics.

[Paul C. Jesup]

They are introduced when under duress, or under the influence of mind altering drugs.But only a FOOL/or an evil one--would claim this CRAP about "consenting adults"It is a LIE from HELL/

I guess I spoke to soon. I have seen medical evidense on studies of the phyical parts of the brain that prove otherwise.

Also, I have heard other people (not on FR) make your same statement and apply it to religion, so becareful in how you state something.

Also, there are 6 and half billion people on Earth, and it is arrogant and self-centered to think that a portion of that many people would not naturally have different 'tastes' than yourself.

[DirtyHarryY2K]

We've been over this before Paul. Shall I summon Clint N. Suhks to this thread to deal with you again?

[Paul C. Jesup]

We've been over this before Paul. Shall I summon Clint N. Suhks to this thread to deal with you again?

You never actually read my discussions with him did you. I basically shot holes in his arguements to the point where he started calling me names and falsely accuse me of things.

[Aquinasfan]

How you can compare two consenting adults to rapists is beyond me

Consent doesn't make an intrinsic evil good.

[StonyBurk]

The studies I have read were like studies done on domestic
cats that went wild. and Science simply cannot prove if those changes you speak of were preexisting-- or a result of the change in environment. As for people with "different taste" I don't care what the Reprobate that have rejected
God choose to do-- So long as the evil ones leave me and my
family alone. Peter Gomes the Reprobate Liar at Harvard
cannot justify his twisted Scripture any more so than any
other described so aptly by the Apostle Paul in his letter
to the Believers at Rome.(ROmans chapter 1 verses 18-32.

[Paul C. Jesup]

Paul:How you can compare two consenting adults to rapists is beyond me

Aquinasfan:Consent doesn't make an intrinsic evil good.

You left out the last part of my statment, "you're as insane as the feminists who say 'all men are rapists."