Skip to comments.
Democrat for Senate: Kill practicing 'gays'
World Net Daily ^
| March 7, 2006
Posted on 03/07/2006 12:46:16 PM PST by Conservative Coulter Fan
Democrat for Senate: Kill practicing 'gays'
Candidate says incumbent Republican not advocating biblical values enough
Posted: March 7, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com
Merrill Keiser |
A Democratic candidate for the U.S. Senate in Ohio wants to make homosexual behavior a capital crime punishable by the death penalty.
Merrill Keiser Jr. is a trucker with no political experience, but he hopes to beat fellow Democrat Rep. Sherrod Brown in the May primary. The winner will try to unseat Republican incumbent Sen. Mike DeWine, assuming he wins the GOP primary.
"Just like we have laws against murder, we have laws against stealing, we have laws against taking drugs we should have laws against immoral conduct," Keiser told WTOL-TV in Toledo.
Keiser, 61, says he's running as a Democrat because that's how he was registered the last time he voted.
The trucker, who hails from Fremont, Ohio, says there needs to be more adherence to biblical values in government, business and education something he claims DeWine is not promoting.
"I believe that the United States has been moved in a Godless direction by the courts," he told the Sandusky Register. "To get good men on the court, we need good senators."
Some of Keiser's other positions include defense of the Second Amendment, securing U.S. borders, lower taxes to stimulate the economy, support of Israel and prayer in public schools.
Keiser told the Register the United States should make conversion to Christianity part of the war on terror to teach Muslims the error of their choice in religion.
The candidate also decries evolution, saying it is contrary to the Declaration of Independence.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: 2006; demprimary; homosexualagenda; merrillkeiser; throwback
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 421-423 next last
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
I wonder how I could have read that line and quoted it accurately when you know for a fact, for a fact, I'm telling you, that I didn't study Leviticus?.
Aren't you special to know what I've read and what I haven't?
And who else do we know that thinks he's SPECIAL? WHO?
SATAN!!!
61
posted on
03/07/2006 1:33:32 PM PST
by
jjmcgo
(Patriarch of the Occident since March 1, 2006)
To: oldleft
The point is, only God is to judge. This is a popular but incorrect understanding. Those who favor relativism and non-judgementalism love to quote Matthew 7:1, but fail to read though verse 5. These verses deal with hypocrisy. Verse 5 says "You hypocrit, first take the log out of your own eye, and THEN you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye."
We can judge, but we must do so while not engaging in disqualifying behaviors.
To: Northeastern_Realist
You seem to forget that God has ordered the destruction of the unrighteous - read the Bible.
63
posted on
03/07/2006 1:34:20 PM PST
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(One of the greatet conservative accomplishments would be the undoing of FDR’s big government.)
To: Mr. Brightside
"Apparently the poster 'Conservative Coulter Fan' IS "biblical" enough to kill homosexuals."
Takes a special kind of 'biblical' to endorse the mass murder of children.
64
posted on
03/07/2006 1:34:42 PM PST
by
NJ_gent
(Modernman should not have been banned.)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
I suggest not feeding the trolls...
65
posted on
03/07/2006 1:35:16 PM PST
by
DBeers
(†)
To: NJ_gent
66
posted on
03/07/2006 1:35:41 PM PST
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(One of the greatet conservative accomplishments would be the undoing of FDR’s big government.)
To: Mr. Brightside
I'm not backing off of anything..
67
posted on
03/07/2006 1:36:20 PM PST
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(One of the greatet conservative accomplishments would be the undoing of FDR’s big government.)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
"You seem to forget that God has ordered the destruction of the unrighteous - read the Bible."
If we put to death every single person who should be put to death as per the Bible, just how many out of the 6 Billion+ men, women, and children on this Earth do you think would be left?
68
posted on
03/07/2006 1:36:59 PM PST
by
NJ_gent
(Modernman should not have been banned.)
To: DBeers
That's patently absurd - you will find liberals using the same line I encountered multiple posts ago - you justify homosexuality or or you downplay the Holiness Code by going down a list of objections about wearing cotton and wool clothing, etc.
69
posted on
03/07/2006 1:38:49 PM PST
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(One of the greatet conservative accomplishments would be the undoing of FDR’s big government.)
70
posted on
03/07/2006 1:39:41 PM PST
by
evets
(God bless president Bush!)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
"...we should have laws against immoral conduct..."When can we expect him to execute himself?
71
posted on
03/07/2006 1:40:17 PM PST
by
Luis Gonzalez
(Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
72
posted on
03/07/2006 1:40:52 PM PST
by
cvq3842
To: AFA-Michigan; AggieCPA; Agitate; AliVeritas; AllTheRage; An American In Dairyland; Annie03; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping!
To be included in or removed from the
HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA PING LIST,
please FReepMail either DBeers or DirtyHarryY2k.
Free Republic homosexual agenda keyword search
"Democrat for Senate: Kill practicing 'gays'..."
A dummycrat once again takes a page out of the leftist handbook in an attempt to incite rage and disparage a morally conservative Republican...
73
posted on
03/07/2006 1:42:07 PM PST
by
DBeers
(†)
To: jjmcgo
Pork is not eaten because it was unclean - for goodness sake pigs will devour anything including their own - not to mention they wallow in their filth, excrements, and dirt. Beef was not prohibited, but you'd know that if you bothered reading, but you have a pitiful understanding - those that ate of unclean foods were merely required to make an offering at the Temple - they we're not condemned like those of Sodom and Gomorrah.
74
posted on
03/07/2006 1:42:46 PM PST
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(One of the greatet conservative accomplishments would be the undoing of FDR’s big government.)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
You haven't responded as to whether or not you, personally, support the stoning of children who curse their father and mother, nor have you explained that answer.
75
posted on
03/07/2006 1:42:48 PM PST
by
NJ_gent
(Modernman should not have been banned.)
To: Conservative Coulter Fan
He may have advocated it in specific situations to some people, but he did not give a blanket command to destroy the unrighteous. In fact, if you ever get around to reading the words of Jesus, you'll find out that we are commanded to love those who persecute us, as this is the best way to spread God's love to others.
To: Mr. Brightside
Actually Jesus referred to that in the scriptures. Say what you will about the command, but it always gets misrepresented as one of "rebellious children" without going into detail. It is for "children" who are drunkards and beat their parents.
When read in context. These are not children at all. Children can't beat up their parents after drinking too much booze.
To: NJ_gent
Takes a special kind of Bible to endorse killing homosexuals and children who curse their parents.
I don't see it in mine.
To: NJ_gent
"First, the person in view is a not a small child but a grown "son." The Hebrew term for "son" (ben) employed here is indefinite. It is sometimes used of children of both sexes (Ex. 21:5) but most often of the male offspring of parents, and that is clearly the sense in this text. Of itself, the word "son" does not give any indication of age. It can refer to a child or a young man (cf. 1 Sam. 4:4; 19:1; 1 Kg. 1:33); age must be determined from the context. In this case, the son in view is not a child, for the sins brought forth in testimony to show his contumacious manner are gluttony and drunkenness (v. 20), hardly the sins of the average 6 or 10 year old! The case also indicates that the parents have tried to restrain their son, but all their efforts have failed (vv. 18, 20); specifying that he is physically beyond their control. Furthermore, the parents bring their son to the magistrates to judge the matter (v. 19); hence, the son would have opportunity to speak on his own behalf. All of this indicates that the "son" in question is no mere child, but, rather, a young man at least in his middle teens or older. As Wright observes, "The law is not talking about naughty children but about seriously delinquent young adults." --Rev. William Einwechter
79
posted on
03/07/2006 1:44:43 PM PST
by
Conservative Coulter Fan
(One of the greatet conservative accomplishments would be the undoing of FDR’s big government.)
To: nonsporting
Allow me to rephrase:
Only can may PUNISH. Of course I myself, by saying that sin is wrong, am judging. But it's my RESPONSIBITY to try to get them to judge themselves.
80
posted on
03/07/2006 1:45:13 PM PST
by
oldleft
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 421-423 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson