Replies

So the hypocrisy of pro-abort Catholics shouldn’t be discussed either?

Which is worse? To commit a sin or to change the laws of this nation to legalize that sin. With or without the law it is still a sin. But should our nation support abortion ideologically and financially?

One is a personal failing (to have an abortion) the other is an act of design for evil (legalizing it).

We don’t go through the Bible and criminalize actions based on the religious texts. But here we are looking at striking down old laws already on the book and saying that there is no social harm in doing so.

Now we find that homosexuality is “the same” as heterosexuality and that while the advocates proclaimed it was about consenting adults in private, it is now being taught to school children with no restrictions on when they can put it into practice (i.e. an age of consent for homosexual acts at 18). And no legislator ever had to raise a hand to vote “yea” because it was run through the courts.

But the legislators do try to thwart any public vote on same sex marriage.

An agenda is being pushed on numerous fronts that is contrary to biblical teaching. They can push their political agenda but they need to come clean about what faith it is that they really practice because they lost their religion a long time ago.

What some conservatives don’t seem to realize is that there has to be a degree of moral axiom in making policy. “Professor” Pete Singer of Princeton argues that defective two year olds should be killed by the state. If enough academic pointy-heads agree, the only thing saving us from a policy shift is the finger of God in stone at Sinai. There will be yuppy econ conservatives who will call that Taliban thinking, but that’s only because they want to be free to shag anything that walks without looking at moral or economic consequences. Traditional Juedo Christian faith SHOULD inform all policy making, and the framers knew it.