Skip to comments.
Alabama Chief Justice Calls Homosexuality 'Evil' in High Court Decision
Nando Times / AP ^
| 2/18/2002
| Phillip Rawls
Posted on 02/18/2002 2:50:21 PM PST by ex-Texan
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 321-325 next last
To: Khepera
I would like to point out that "Evil" is "Evil" unique or not. I do not support "Evil" people in any endevour. Especially parenthood. As I said in another post, I don't find any Scriptural evidence that homosexuals are uniquely immoral in comparison to adulterers and fornicators. I plan on doing a study on this in the near future, and I'll pass it along when I'm done. If someone has something they can share with me, I'd appreciate it.
To: Khepera
Oh ..no point, just a little bit of info I pick up from an insider...thought evryone might like to know....
To: GotDangGenius
True, but if he did in writing state that he based his decision even in part on biblical grounds then this case is Supreme Court bound. And if as a result of this the woman ever gets custody of the kids then the only one to blame for that is Judge Moore.
To: kezekiel
The point I make is that even people who swear are sinners. Even people who hate their enemies are sinners. Even people who lust after sexy women are sinners.
To infer that, because all are sinners, none should be parents goes against God's own teaching. God knew every word we would utter before we were born. Yet he told us to "be fruitful and multiply." To have kids. To become parents. Despite the fact that He knew we'd be sinners.
Queers can't do that, because it requires a male and a female to procreate. That morally sound (though sinful) people might thus believe that it is wrong for queers to raise children is in keeping with the social/sexual/parental order established by God.
That's all.
To: Texas Eagle
We need to clone this man ASAP!!!!!!
265
posted on
02/19/2002 8:39:59 AM PST
by
B4Ranch
To: gg188
BUMP that.
266
posted on
02/19/2002 8:40:34 AM PST
by
ecomcon
To: kezekiel
No I don't think scripture does make it "Uniquely" immoral. They (These sins) are all immoral. A sin or "occurrence of evil" is not unique and so what if it was? It still has no bearing. We as a society should not condone or reward evil. Two people who wish to raise a child out of the confines of a marriage who participate in an immoral/perverted lifestyle do not deserve the support of society. Marriage is defined in the bible as being a union between 1 man and 1 woman. 2 women or 2 men do not a marriage make. As for letting perverts raise children? Are you really so dim?
267
posted on
02/19/2002 8:41:21 AM PST
by
Khepera
To: reflecting
Why would I like to know how many pages? Where they big pages or small pages? Was the print big or small? Why would it be important?
268
posted on
02/19/2002 8:42:35 AM PST
by
Khepera
To: Gargantua
That morally sound (though sinful) people might thus believe that it is wrong for queers to raise children is in keeping with the social/sexual/parental order established by God. I would agree with you, but not necessarily in the case where the homosexual is the natural parent. It is entirely conceivable to me where, if the father was a serial fornicator, with a revolving door of sleep-over girlfriends, it might be better for the child to be with his lesbian mother, provided she showed more stability and discretion. This is based on my understanding of Scripture, which does not, in my reading, uniquely condemn homosexuality vis-a-vis fornication and adultery.
My goal is not to soften our stance against homosexuality, but to stiffen it against *all* forms of sexual immorality, which are arguably equally destructive.
To: Khepera
"As for letting perverts raise children? Are you really so dim?" Probably. Then again, kezeke may just be queer...?
To: kezekiel
"...it might be better for the child to be with his lesbian mother, provided she showed more stability and discretion..." Stability and discretion. A lesbian. You're serious, aren't you? God help us all.
To: all
First of all, this case will not be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, or to any other court. The case involves the interpretation of Alabama law, as to which the Alabama Supreme Court has the last word. There is no question of federal law for the U.S. Supreme Court or any other federal court to interpret.
Second, Judge Moore's comments have no precedential value. The opinion of the Alabama Supreme Court, which Judge Moore did not author, merely holds that a state appellate court was wrong to overturn the state trial court's factual (as opposed to legal) determination that the mother did not bear her burden to prove that the father was abusive and that a transfer of custody to the mother would materially improve the lives of the children. Her homosexuality entered into the Supreme Court's opinion only minimally, if at all. The Supreme Court did not hold that homosexuality was grounds for denying custody.
Judge Moore wrote a concurring opinion in which he offers his opinion that (among other things) traditional legal and extra-legal abhorrence of homosexuality should be grounds for denying custody. Judge Moore's concurrence, which no one else signed on to and which in my view is rambling and nearly incoherent, does not bind any court.
The opinion is here: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=al&vol=1002045&invol=2 (Sorry, I don't know how to link)
272
posted on
02/19/2002 8:50:34 AM PST
by
Fethiye
To: Khepera
I must humbly ask you forgiveness, had I known posting to the last comment a small piece of information, that had not been added previously to the conversation, would be so troubling to you, I certainly would have refrained, goodness knows I would not want to over burden you with any unsolicited, unimportant, inconsequential, trivial, data,....
To: lavaroise
You are arguing the "Critical Legal Studies" position, that all law is politics, that there are no neutral principles, that ultimately there is no law. If you and they are right, our democratic, rule-of-law based society is doomed, and we will soon revert to a state of nature in which the only right is might.
274
posted on
02/19/2002 9:00:51 AM PST
by
maro
To: ex-Texan
Let me tell you now. Alabama will not be embarrsed for what Judge Moore did.We are very proud of Judge Moore, and thank God for a man such as him, who is not afraid to take a stand for the truth.Alabama is ashamed of people such as you & your Homosexual or queer lifestyle. God Bless Judge Moore.Grannie
275
posted on
02/19/2002 9:07:43 AM PST
by
grannie
To: Gargantua; Khepera
Probably. Then again, kezeke may just be queer...?Stability and discretion. A lesbian. You're serious, aren't you? God help us all.
I would say you're having trouble seeing past your hatred of homosexuality. I tried providing Scripture to support my arguments, but instead you respond as you have. That I "may just be queer?" Please.
Rather than allow Scripture to teach you, you have been informed by your prejudices and hatreds. Homosexuality is SO repugnant to you, that you ignore that I condemn it as sexual immorality because I don't condemn it as severely as you do. You, who claim to be sons of God, treat a brother with a complete lack of charity, and don't bother to crack your Bibles to enlighten me.
Think a second time, friends.
To: reflecting
I'm not deriding you enthusiasm or saying it is not important for some reason. Im just trying to decipher its importance. I do not want to miss out on a good point. Bad points on the other hand just make for a hand full of bad points. Same for handfuls of trivial crap, they are just handfuls of crap. Which are these?
277
posted on
02/19/2002 9:16:47 AM PST
by
Khepera
To: reflecting
I'm interested in reading the opinion, do you have a link?
To: kezekiel
God (Jesus) Condemned all sin and immorality as being of equal depravity. Are you telling us there are degrees? Does God tell you there are degrees? Please point out where he says there are degrees! I have read the bible many times and have never picked up on degrees. Maybe the one punishment of death and hell was not ment for lesser sins. Where does he mention lesser sins with lesser punishment? I missed that.
I do not hate homosexuals. I hate what they do but not them. I would have them punished for what they choose to do. How can we punish for what is choosen not to be done? Now a person who does not participate in homosexual/sodomite behaviours should not be punished. have I advocated that they should?
279
posted on
02/19/2002 9:25:18 AM PST
by
Khepera
To: Crawdad
I'm serious. Somebody help me. Is it going half-circle or full-circle when you go from Roy Moore in Post #1 to "Hitler was a pervert" in Post #153? Hey - it's a FR thread with Homosexuality in the title. What do you expect. Hang on and enjoy the ride.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260, 261-280, 281-300 ... 321-325 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