Skip to comments.
Ron Paul: Less Lonely These Days
Townhall.com ^
| May 11, 2011
| John Stossel
Posted on 05/11/2011 5:19:28 AM PDT by Kaslin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 241-258 next last
To: DJ MacWoW
Let me write slowly...
What does Christ have to do with “social” or “cultural”?
121
posted on
05/11/2011 10:11:23 AM PDT
by
the_conscience
(We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
To: the_conscience
Has nothing at all to do with homosexuality, homomarriage or the arguments they use to try and justify it.
Prove homosexuality is biologically the same as heteresexual pairing.
“Free association” doesn’t mean what you are trying to claim it does.
122
posted on
05/11/2011 10:13:34 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
To: the_conscience; Ditter; little jeremiah; trisham; metmom; DJ MacWoW; BykrBayb; Darksheare; xzins; ..
I, wagglebee, believe the State has a duty to tell people who can associate with whom. I find the Constitutional principle of free association to be false and unchristian. No troll, sodomites are free to associate with whomever they want, we are talking about them "marrying" each other.
Strange that you claim to be a Christian while pushing the homosexual agenda.
The Christian thing to do is tell the sodomites that they are sinning and call on them to repent, YOU want them to get married.
123
posted on
05/11/2011 10:15:00 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: the_conscience
Everything. And we are back to my
original post to you.
Look at your tagline and then tell me drugs should be legal. mommya admitted to being a social liberal. Square that with Christ, our Constitution and our nations Christian roots. And dont forget homosexuality.
Let me put this more simply so you'll get it: Does Christ approve of believers supporting homosexuality, abortion and forcing others to support social programs? Does our Constitution support those things? Did the Founders support those things?
124
posted on
05/11/2011 10:21:51 AM PDT
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: wagglebee; the_conscience
I like how the conscience keeps trying to put words in your mouth.
And he has zero idea what free association means.
It has nothing to do with marriage.
By his logic, a man should be allowed to marry his goat , or pair off with horses, dogs, etc because it’s ‘free association’.
I’ve heard that free association crap used to support homosexuality before.
From a troll not too long ago.
125
posted on
05/11/2011 10:27:57 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
To: DJ MacWoW; Darksheare
Just so nobody gets the idea that the Founding Fathers were defenders of sodomy and would have embraced homosexual "marriage":
The Founders on Homosexuality
126
posted on
05/11/2011 10:29:53 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: Darksheare
Homosexuals have and have always had the EXACT SAME RIGHTS as every other American when it comes to marriage. There are NO LAWS that prohibit homosexuals from getting married and there never have been.
127
posted on
05/11/2011 10:31:38 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: wagglebee; Darksheare
Yup. And I have a link somewhere about Jefferson supporting castration for sodomites while he was Governor of Virginia. Unfortunately for sodomites, they kept the death penalty.
128
posted on
05/11/2011 10:32:25 AM PDT
by
DJ MacWoW
(America! The wolves are at your door! How will you answer the knock?)
To: Darksheare
I suspect that some of the pro-homosexual trolls who claim to be Christians are actually members of polygamist cults and view homosexual "marriage" as a step toward legalized polygamy.
129
posted on
05/11/2011 10:33:13 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: DJ MacWoW
That's mentioned in the thread I linked.
130
posted on
05/11/2011 10:35:33 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: wagglebee
I know.
But don’t tell them that.
They’re busy trying to be an elevated protected class where the rest of us are forced and legislated to accept them in every inch of our lives and our childrens lives.
If free association ‘applies’ at all, then I am also free to NOT associate with them.
131
posted on
05/11/2011 10:35:39 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
To: wagglebee
NAMBLA types also push for homosexual marriage while pushing for lowering the age of consent.
They see it as an open door to their ‘wildest dreams’ and legal protection from prosecution.
132
posted on
05/11/2011 10:37:56 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
To: Darksheare
So the Constitutional principle of free association has something to do with biology?
133
posted on
05/11/2011 11:10:06 AM PDT
by
the_conscience
(We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
To: the_conscience; Darksheare; Ditter; little jeremiah; trisham; metmom; DJ MacWoW; BykrBayb; xzins; ..
So the Constitutional principle of free association has something to do with biology? Please explain where, exactly, in the Constitution you find the "right" for homosexuals to marry.
Do you also support the "right" to polygamy? If not, why is homosexual "marriage" acceptable and not polygamy?
What about marriage to farm animals? Do you support that as well? If not, why not.
Have you missed the numerous threads over the years where Jim Robinson has explicitly stated that Free Republic WILL NOT be used to further the homosexual agenda? Which is EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
134
posted on
05/11/2011 11:15:42 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: the_conscience
135
posted on
05/11/2011 11:16:13 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
To: wagglebee; DJ MacWoW
No troll, sodomites are free to associate with whomever they want, we are talking about them "marrying" each other.I'll try to write as clearly as I can so even you two can understand. I would not attend a Church which sanctioned homosexual marriage because marriage has spiritual implications and that's why it should remain something for each Church to decide. Now if two people of the same sex wish to contract with each other to share their possessions then our Constitution allows them to do that. Whatever they believe that contract entails spiritually is none of the State's concern.
The Christian thing to do is tell the sodomites that they are sinning and call on them to repent...
Of course that is the Christian thing to do but it is one thing to tell them and another thing to use the State to force them to comply.
136
posted on
05/11/2011 11:21:43 AM PDT
by
the_conscience
(We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
To: the_conscience
I’ll say it as plainly as I can:
Free association has NOTHING to do with marriage, homosexual or otherwise.
Got it?
137
posted on
05/11/2011 11:23:13 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
To: Darksheare; DJ MacWoW
If free association has nothing to do with marriage I suppose you guys would support the State setting up forced marriages.
I get the feeling you guys would be comfortable in a Muslim country.
138
posted on
05/11/2011 11:27:36 AM PDT
by
the_conscience
(We ought to obey God, rather than men. (Acts 5:29b))
To: the_conscience; Darksheare; Ditter; little jeremiah; trisham; metmom; DJ MacWoW; BykrBayb; xzins; ..
I'll try to write as clearly as I can so even you two can understand. I would not attend a Church which sanctioned homosexual marriage because marriage has spiritual implications and that's why it should remain something for each Church to decide. Now if two people of the same sex wish to contract with each other to share their possessions then our Constitution allows them to do that. Whatever they believe that contract entails spiritually is none of the State's concern. Your clarity on this thread has never been an issue, the issue is your support of homosexual "marriage."
Of course that is the Christian thing to do but it is one thing to tell them and another thing to use the State to force them to comply.
Homosexuals have NEVER been barred from marriage, they have always had EXACTLY THE SAME RIGHTS as everyone else. YOU are trying to force the government to create "special rights" for homosexuals. YOU are coming right out of the left's playbook.
139
posted on
05/11/2011 11:27:49 AM PDT
by
wagglebee
("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
To: the_conscience
Nice of you to try and put words in my mouth.
How about you prove that free association has something to do with marriage?
Show proof, show what the lw says on it.
Go ahead, I dare you.
140
posted on
05/11/2011 11:30:08 AM PDT
by
Darksheare
(You will never defeat Bok Choy!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120, 121-140, 141-160 ... 241-258 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