LOL
With a face like his I can kinda see his point.
Dude is a loser and women don't want to have anything to with him.
He's got an axe to grind.
Posted on 03/28/2011 5:40:36 PM PDT by LonelyCon
Gov. Sean Parnell's appointee for the panel that nominates state judges testified Wednesday that he would like to see Alaskans prosecuted for having sex outside of marriage.
The candidate, Don Haase of Valdez, also admitted under questioning by members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that his official resume failed to disclose his leadership role in Eagle Forum Alaska, which advocates for social conservative issues. He most recently was president of the organization, but resigned when he learned of his nomination, he said.
[Snip]
Paskvan: "Do you believe [adultery] should be a crime?"
Haase: "Yeah, I think it's very harmful to have extramarital affairs. It's harmful to children, it's harmful to the spouse who entered a legally binding agreement to marry the person that's cheating on them."
Paskvan: "What about premarital affairs -- should that be a crime?"
Haase: "I think that would be up to the voters certainly. If it came before (the state) as a vote, I probably would vote for it ... I can see where it would be a matter for the state to be involved with because of the spread of disease and the likelihood that it would cause violence. I can see legitimate reasons to push that as a crime."
Haase then asked why those questions were relevant.
"You are injecting yourself into the judicial system and so I think it's fair inquiry," Paskvan replied. "If you have a motivation to limit who would be advanced to a judgeship ... then your beliefs and attitudes are important," Paskvan said.
(Excerpt) Read more at adn.com ...
1. Untrue.
2. Even if it were true, Ad Hominem Tu Quoque.
Fine with me.
Someone willing to cheer on the destruction, willing even to help in the destruction of the moral pillars of society -- of civilization asks to be free from personal attack? LOL!
Like an arsonist with gas can in hand runs from the blaze yelling at those chasing him -- "Fight the fire! Stop bothering me!"
Yeah, they should be stoned. It says so in some book or the other.
I agree that Margaret Meade was a gullible moron with an axe to grind, but the church records of births, deaths, and marriages from old New England are hard to ignore. And one doesn’t have to be a libertine or hedonist (I am neither) to know that there’s a difference between Sin and Criminality.
Ok.
That you would institute a Theocracy in this nation implies you are willing to do so by force as it's absolutely certain you would never gain more than 3% of the voting public to your point of view.
That good Americans are willing to oppose such efforts to be subject to an "American Taliban" (and yes, you're no different than the Afghan Taliban)by any means necessary shows that this aspect of liberty shall be preserved.
I think it should all depend on what the Bible says about adultery and its appropriate consequences.
“And one doesn’t have to be a libertine or hedonist (I am neither) to know that there’s a difference between Sin and Criminality.”
There is a difference between God’s law and Man’s law. In some cases Mans law is modeled after Gods and in other cases its closer to Satans.
I think there is an element of "if I'm not gettin any, nobody else is either".
Generally, they get theirs from children.
I fully agree.
Now, go round up some votes.
+1
Queen Elizabeth is supposed to have been urged by member of her privy council to jail and punish Catholics. Her response is supposed to have been, “I won’t make windows into mens’ souls.” In other words, all that mattered to her was that they were `good Englishmen’ (translated: loyal to her).
As late as the 19th century the great state of Maryland had a criminal law that made a third offense for blasphemy punishable by death. Shirley ... you don’t think we should return to those days, do you?
Oh, and my degree was issued back in 1976 so it's hardly relevant, and whether you believe I received it or not even less so. But feel free to rant away. My end of this pointless conversation is done.
wow the attacks against this guy are pathetic.
he’s a loser and it ain’t no ones business what goes on in my house or Vegas.
A) It’s natural and commendable for a man to have several mates.
B) The only punishment for an unmaried woman who has sex with a man—be it with a man married to another woman or not—should be social censure, and also she should have no claim on the man for the support of herself and of any resulting children.
To do otherwise, is to dilute the institution of marriage and nullify the the true foundation for legal marriage: which is to make the man legally responsible for the support of his wife and any children she bears (unless he can prove those children the result of her adultery).
But since it’s now OK for sex outside of marriage, and since it’s now OK for women to get palimony, who needs marriage any more?
And if marriage isn’t for support of the weaker sex and her children, might as well marry men to men and women to women.
Or better, just eliminate marriage altogether instead of continuing to prop up what has become a sham.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/forum/2010-04-26-column26_ST_N.htm
“Adultery, in many states, is still a crime”
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071203092407AAzAq2x
“It is ILLEGAL in:
Alabama
Arizona
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Illinois
Indiana
Kansas
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
North Carolina
Oklahoma
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Tennessee
Utah
Virginia
As of 1996.”
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.