Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mother appeals ruling on gays
Washington Times ^ | Nov. 5, 2003 | Valerie Richardson

Posted on 11/13/2003 7:42:03 AM PST by Bernard Marx

Edited on 07/12/2004 4:10:20 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

DENVER A Christian mother is appealing a judge's decision that prohibits her from teaching her daughter that homosexuality is wrong.

Cheryl Clark, who left a lesbian relationship in 2000 after converting to Christianity, was ordered by Denver County Circuit Judge John Coughlin to "make sure that there is nothing in the religious upbringing or teaching that the minor child is exposed to that can be considered homophobic."


(Excerpt) Read more at dynamic.washtimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: christian; firstamendment; gayagenda; homosexualagenda; imperialjudiciary; persecution; prisoners; secularism; sin; thoughtcontrol
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 next last
This ruling strikes to the heart of First Amendment protections and enters the realm of thought control. With the increasing secularization of the judiciary and homosexual activism, this sort of thing may be coming soon to a courtroom near you. We have a clash of cultures in this country and events are nearing the breaking point. A parent has the right to instruct his/her child in religious beliefs. It's guaranteed in the Constitution. But a secular imperial judiciary is attempting to override the Constitution without amending it first.
1 posted on 11/13/2003 7:42:04 AM PST by Bernard Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
Scr*w this judge and the horse he rode in on! How dare he make such a ruling and on what grounds?
If it were possible he would get the big finger real fast....but of course the poor woman can't do that because she would lose her child.
This is ENRAGING!
2 posted on 11/13/2003 7:47:37 AM PST by Adder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx; Dataman; Southflanknorthpawsis; 2Jedismom
I know it's easy for me to say from my safe perspective, but in her situation, I can picture myself in public, reading from the germane (and univocal) Biblical passages, without comment....

...then looking up and saying loudly and clearly, "There. Jail me."

Dan
3 posted on 11/13/2003 7:50:24 AM PST by BibChr ("...behold, they have rejected the word of the LORD, so what wisdom is in them?" [Jer. 8:9])
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
This ruling strikes to the heart of First Amendment protections and enters the realm of thought control.

I disagree. The primary issue here is the judge's ruling that joint custody should continue, and his recognition that there is a great deal of acrimony between the two women.

I suspect McLeod is being a first-class vindictive bitch, trying to get back at Clark through the little girl, who is an innocent pawn. To do that, she's using all means available, including Christian teaching, to poison the child against someone whom she no doubt loves as a parent.

My sympathies are with the child. She should not be treated like a piece of meat. If that means keeping McLeod's from acting like a Pharisee, so be it.

4 posted on 11/13/2003 7:55:15 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Ooops -- switch names between McLeod and Clark -- but my opinion remains the same.
5 posted on 11/13/2003 7:56:20 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
She can come to my house. Move now away from the former lover and raise her daughter in a nice Christian household. My daughters would love the company.
6 posted on 11/13/2003 7:58:44 AM PST by netmilsmom ( We are SITCOMs-single income, two kids, oppressive mortgage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
My sympathies are with the child. She should not be treated like a piece of meat. If that means keeping McLeod's from acting like a Pharisee, so be it.

This is a tough case. As the article mentioned, orders by judges to parents not to bad-mouth each other in front of their children after a divorce are not uncommon. The only thing that is different here is the religious component. Not sure where I stand on this.

7 posted on 11/13/2003 8:01:16 AM PST by Modernman (What Would Jimmy Buffet Do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
You don't think it sets a dangerous precedent?
8 posted on 11/13/2003 8:05:08 AM PST by agrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
>>Dr. Clark had argued that Miss McLeod should not have joint custody because she was not interested in the adoption while it was taking place and that it was never their intention that she would act as a parent.

"Elsey never adopted this child. It's an egregious situation because the court is giving custody to someone who is not related to the child and has not adopted the child," Mr. Staver said. <<

You may have switched the names but you were right the first time. The Lesbian is being manipulative and using the courts to control. The Born Again Christian woman is doing what she thinks is right for HER legal child. If this were a woman trying to get her child away from her promiscuous ex-husband, would you think the same?? Lesbianism is a dangerous lifestyle as well.

9 posted on 11/13/2003 8:06:47 AM PST by netmilsmom ( We are SITCOMs-single income, two kids, oppressive mortgage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
This ruling DOES strike to the heart of First Amendment protections and enters the realm of thought control.

What is the difference between this case and another case of a hetro family going through the same situation? This case can be used, if successful, as a templete for others and can restrict what you can say and do in your own home. Do you see any demands on the lesbian to restrict her speach in her home about Christians? NO! That's why it so one-sided and obiously pro-gay. The ruling can effect even families that are not going through a divorce if another court see fit. This can effect you and your family. If you can't raise your family the way you see fit, you have no free speach. All it takes is just one judge with an agenda to mandate how you raise your children.
10 posted on 11/13/2003 8:09:08 AM PST by Only1choice____Freedom (If everything you experienced, believed, lived was a lie, would you want to know the truth?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
... was ordered by Denver County Circuit Judge John Coughlin to "make sure that there is nothing in the religious upbringing or teaching that the minor child is exposed to that can be considered homophobic."

Mother ordered to not teach daughter that homosexuality is evil.

Well, it's not only evil but those who practice these sinful acts are people that children should run from.

Consider:

The following list cites alarming statistics showing that eight of the top ten serial killers as of 1992, in the United States were involved in homosexuality.

Donald Garvey: 37 Murders.. a nurse’s aid who was convicted of 37 murders in Kentucky and Ohio. Psychologists testified that “Harvey said he was a homosexual.” The New York Time, August 20, and August 17th, 1991.

John Wayne Gacy: 33 Murders.. a professed homosexual.. who killed 33 young men and boys and buried them in his basement. The New York Times, February 22, 1980.

Patrick Wayne Kearney: 32 Murders.. The New York Times described him as “an acknowledged homosexual” and “..perpetrator of the “homosexual trash bag murders.” The New York Times, July 27, 1977.

Bruce Davis: 28 murders.. killed 28 young men and boys after having sex with them. The New York Times, January 21, 1984.

Corll, Henry and Owen: 32 Murders. Dean Corll, Elmer Wayne Henley, and David Owen Brooks were the members of a Texas homosexual torture/murder ring that captured and mutilated 27 young men. The New York Times, July 27, 1974

Juan Corona: 25 Murders.. an admitted homosexual, killed 25 male migrant workers. The New York Times, October 4, 1972

Jeffrey Dahmer: 17 Murders.. a convicted child molester and practicing and admitted homosexual, lured 17 young men and boys to his apartment, had sex with them, then killed them and dismembered them. He ate parts of his victims bodies..Dahmer was active in “gay rights” organizations and had participated in “gay pride” parades. Michael C. Buelow. “Police Believe Suspect Killed 17.” The Oregonian, July 26, 1991, pages A1 and A24. Also: “Relative in Dahmer Case Sues. “USA Today, August 6, 1991, page 3A.

Stephen Kraft: 16 murders.. killed at least 16 young men after drugging, sodomizing and torturing them. Robert L. Mauro. “The Nation’s Leading Serial Killers.” The Wanderer, October 31, 1991

William Bonin: 14 Murders.. tortured and killed 14 young men.. had sex with this victims before and after they dided. . Robert L. Mauro. “The Nation’s Leading Serial Killers.” The Wanderer, October 31, 1991 (Clowes:96)

Dahmer was active in “gay rights” organizations and had participated in “gay pride” parades.

Homosexuality is diversity?

These sick, demented sadists should marry and adopt children?

11 posted on 11/13/2003 8:09:10 AM PST by JesseHousman (Execute Mumia Abu-Jamal)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
If this were a woman trying to get her child away from her promiscuous ex-husband, would you think the same?? Lesbianism is a dangerous lifestyle as well.

What does promiscuity have to do with being a fit parent?

The problem here seems to be that this is probably a very acrimonious situation. The judge is trying to keep the child from being turned against one member of this couple while the thing gets sorted out.

12 posted on 11/13/2003 8:11:17 AM PST by Modernman (What Would Jimmy Buffet Do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
Then why didn't the judge put any similar restrictions on the other?
13 posted on 11/13/2003 8:14:22 AM PST by agrace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: agrace
Then why didn't the judge put any similar restrictions on the other?

I don't know. Maybe there was no evidence that the other woman had anti-Christian or anti-heterosexual views. I don't think a judge is going out on a limb to conclude that a born-again Christian might hold anti-homosexual views.

14 posted on 11/13/2003 8:19:10 AM PST by Modernman (What Would Jimmy Buffet Do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
So, you would prevent a judge from running my life as well? What if I like being told what to do?

If a judge can't step in and run the family, then we might as well not have judges.

15 posted on 11/13/2003 8:19:13 AM PST by Old Professer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
>>What does promiscuity have to do with being a fit parent?<<

Whoa!!!
What DOESN'T it have to do with being a fit parent?

Children learn by example. Those who sleep with many partners increase the risk of STDs, perhaps condemning one to death. When that becomes normalized in a child's mind, it is ok for the child to do it in later years. Need more?

16 posted on 11/13/2003 8:19:52 AM PST by netmilsmom ( We are SITCOMs-single income, two kids, oppressive mortgage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
I suspect McLeod is being a first-class vindictive bitch, trying to get back at Clark through the little girl, who is an innocent pawn. To do that, she's using all means available, including Christian teaching, to poison the child against someone whom she no doubt loves as a parent. My sympathies are with the child. She should not be treated like a piece of meat. If that means keeping McLeod's from acting like a Pharisee, so be it.

ON what basis do you state this?? Other than a hostility towards Christians? Dr. Clark converted to Christianity, and SHE is the adoptive parent, not Mcleod. This is a direct attack on freedom of religion and the right of a parent to raise her child as she sees fit.

17 posted on 11/13/2003 8:22:19 AM PST by ibheath (Born-again and grateful to God for it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Those who sleep with many partners increase the risk of STDs, perhaps condemning one to death

Define "many partners." A father should have his kid taken away if he dates a lot? Or engages in any activity that might increase the risk of death? Okay, what if the father rock climbs in his spare time? That's an activity that is risky and might condemn one to death. What if the father is a soldier? That's an activity that's risky and might condemn one to death.

When that becomes normalized in a child's mind, it is ok for the child to do it in later years

So, following your logic, the examples I gave above of various activities (rock climbing, soldiering) might normalize those dangerous activities in the minds of a child, so soldiers and rock climbers (among others) are unfit parents.

18 posted on 11/13/2003 8:25:27 AM PST by Modernman (What Would Jimmy Buffet Do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ibheath
This case is not even close. Totally ridiculous ruling. Mcleod has no blood or legal rights to this child. This is like an old boyfriend coming to take your child just because you lived with him for a long time. Absolutely asinine. People just don't have common sense anymore. This judge just wanted to maintain a homosexual influence over the child. Total idiot.
19 posted on 11/13/2003 8:26:53 AM PST by bluebunny (Formerly known as lemondropkid56)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Bernard Marx
But, the faggot judge will permit normalphobic teaching!
20 posted on 11/13/2003 8:27:33 AM PST by Tacis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-106 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson