[Natural Law]

"That absurd statement characterizes you as well as any that you have posted."

Gay or straight, Catholic or Protestant there was absolutely nothing noble about any of the nobility. Religion was merely another tool in their bag with which to exert more control and extract more wealth. (Oh, and by the way James I, like Edward II, was a flaming.)

[MarkBsnr]

Gay or straight, Catholic or Protestant there was absolutely nothing noble about any of the nobility. Religion was merely another tool in their bag with which to exert more control and extract more wealth.

Exactly so. The KJV 1611 and its successors, as well as the WCF, were created to be political documents masquerading as religious ones, by the sovereign government of England.

(Oh, and by the way James I, like Edward II, was a flaming.)

An old tradition of European royalty, especially true in the days when women were looked upon as lesser beings and only to be tolerated in the quest for producing the heir to the throne or the estate. Hence Henry Tudor's irritation at a succession of wives, although there is nothing to suggest that he dabbled in any way...

[editor-surveyor]

> “Gay or straight, Catholic or Protestant there was absolutely nothing noble about any of the nobility. Religion was merely another tool in their bag with which to exert more control and extract more wealth”

.
How novel; another strawman!

I am not a Monarchist! - All of the monarchists I know of on FR are Catholics.

I merely object to your false portrayal of an individual, about whom sufficient is known to show your post as pure mendacity.
.

[OLD REGGIE]

Gay or straight, Catholic or Protestant there was absolutely nothing noble about any of the nobility. Religion was merely another tool in their bag with which to exert more control and extract more wealth. (Oh, and by the way James I, like Edward II, was a flaming.)

Flamers?

OPEN A CAN OF WORMS.