Posted on 11/07/2003 12:35:42 PM PST by carlo3b
Bishop V. Gene Robinson = adulter and homosexual
Gee, nice church. Make sure you show your support and put lots of money in this collection plate. - NOT!
(Apostate church = 666)
Bingo!.. Sick but sooooo true!
According to the American Indian prophacies, Sodom California, the lower half of Florida, and the homosexual area of the North East are going find themselves "cleansed" by the ocean when California cracks. They'll be burried by the sea.
Hey, if God can do it once before for Soddom and Gamorrah, why not do it again? He let them all die of disease before in Romans 1, and they're ignoring the AIDs warning.
He'll cleanse the land again one way or another.
So it is.
89% feel abortion is murder. That makes the few who support it the social misfits.
Same with homoxexuality. 99% of Americans are heterosexuals. That makes the homosexuals the dysfunctionals.
In a Marxist society, i.e., liberal socialist, the mutants rule via facist litigation.
In a representitive society, the majority of the voters choose the right path.
The concervative path, BTW. That's why the mutants never take their issues before the voters. They'll lose.
Were they? The last judge I saw FR people going off on was an appointee of former president Bush with pretty good credentials. In that case, too, it looked like it was the legislature at fault.
Just because some judges in Texas want to play fast and loose with the law with a result that liberals love, doesn't mean some judges in New Hampshire coming up with a result liberals love is necessarily playing playing the law loose.
I don't know about you, but personally, and in every way I hear it used regularly, "sexual intercourse" requires a penis be in the equation somewhere. The law simply needs to be amended. Check your state law to see what would happen in a case like this.
The law is a straw man? Huh. So you don't believe that judges are supposed to enforce the law as it is written? Instead you'd like them to interpret what they think it should mean? Or rather, what you think it should mean? I'm sorry, but I don't consider adherence to the legal code to be a 'strawman.'
In Texas there is no law against adultery at all, though it can be used as grounds for divorce, while in New Hampshire it is a misdemeanor. Maybe if you are so concerned about legislating morality you should get your home state to catch up with New Hampshire which is far ahead of you in this regard.
So let me get this straight. You believe that judges, when facing a law that is unclear on a subject, should interpret it to mean what they want it to mean, and rule accordingly? Or should they take a narrow interpretation of the law, ruling simply on what it says?
In otherwords, are you for judicial activism or against it? Do you believe judicial activism is good when it suits your purposes?
Not any more, where have you been..dare I ask? The queers have a whole new set of rules, and nothing is what it used to be.
Do you think a BL@WJOB is sex, if so, and I am really going out on a limb with you, do you think that would be adultress? . . I thought so.. so how have the liberal judges found reasons to overturn our moral codes in this country and not seen that simple fact??? Not on my watch, you can run you game somewhere else.. sorry, all of my compassion was spent fighting off the foxes in our schools.. Have you no shame?.. LOL
Conservatives opposed to judicial activism advocating judicial activism--that kind of hypocrisy?
I really don't care if it's "fair" or not, I'm just learning how to play in the NEW WORLD OF POLITICS.. If Liberal Judges can find new rights for every narrow-minded group of freaks, out of whole cloth, then they can find some commonsense in this case. SEX "IS" SEX, with or without a penetration. Didn't you mother teach you this stuff?
This case only has to do with money. The divorce is going to occur no matter what. The finding of 'fault' would change how property is allocated. It's just another petty, sordid divorce battle.
BTW a gay group filed an amicus brief supporting the interpretation of lesbian sex as adultery. So they agreed with you on how to interpret the law. Thought you'd be happy to know - (LOL)
Here's a good article in the main state newspaper:
The Union Leader and New Hampshire Sunday News - Court: Lesbian affair not adultery
Thats a hell of a question.. It has become quite obvious that since SHAME is a missing trait in some households, perhaps Laws should replace it!
As for DEVIANT SEX, yes I do believe there should be LAWs against all forms of perverted same sex activities.. Is that clear enough?
If they're going to err, they should err on the side of life - a God givin right in the constitution. This ruling also would include men. Men are more apt to be infected by the AIDs virus through homosexual behavior.
In this case, they favored the deathstyle, rather than the lifestyle.
The moral fabric supports the constitution, because when all morals are gone, why not lie about everything? Who will care? Who will be able to condemn it? The moral? No, they're politically incorrect.
WOW, now there are at least 3 things we have in common, breathing, peeing and this!
Yep.. life is a bit@h!
How right you are!!!! We just have to learn to stand up to these freaks, and drag them into the daylight where even the unwashed will see them for what they are.. Lost souls!!
As they sow, so shall they reap. They choose a deathstyle choice, that's exactly what they'll get.
In the end, these various anti-Christ groups will eventually clash and war with themselves, and the evil will be killing off evil.
So it is. Amen
Matthew 19:8-9
Jesus replied, "Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for marital unfaithfulness, and marries another woman commits adultery."
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.