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

Skip to comments.

White House Officially Recognizes Homosexual Unions and Parenting?
Christian News Wire ^ | May 30, 2007

Posted on 05/30/2007 10:04:56 AM PDT by Between the Lines

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-103 next last
To: 1rudeboy

“This thread is being hijacked. Remain in your seats. We are returning to the airport.”

what do you mean? We haven’t even gotten to illegal aliens yet.


51 posted on 05/30/2007 11:52:10 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 1rudeboy

LOL
My bad. the post immediately following yours is about — tadaah — illegal aliens!


52 posted on 05/30/2007 11:53:35 AM PDT by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
I don’t know. Maybe it is like ex-smokers being the most vocal about smoking; ex-gays are the most vocal about gays.

One thought that came to mind is that he has to be outspokenly anti-gay to reassure his wife he will not backslide.

53 posted on 05/30/2007 12:12:13 PM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

IF.....

If the parties were switched and Cheney and family were democrats; the picture would not simply be Dick and Lynne with the grandchild.

It would be of the grandparents with Mary AND Heather featured prominently. Oh yes, and the baby, too.


54 posted on 05/30/2007 12:35:18 PM PDT by Responsibility2nd (Global Warming is Leftist Theology - Why is it Being Taught in School?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
We explained why we believed that children should have a mother and a father and told them that, should they go though with this, we would sue for custody of our grandchild.

Wow, I'm frankly just appalled by this. I'm a mother and a grandmother, and I simply cannot imagine telling my daughter that if I disagreed with choices she was making in her life I would try to steal her child. And while having a child raised by lesbians might not be ideal, neither would having a child raised by old grandparents. There's a reason for menopause.

I also have to point out that I think you're misinformed if you think a grandparent can simply go to court win custody of a child because they disagree with the lifestyle of the child's parents(s). You'd have to show some harm to the child, and I've never seen a case where the homosexuality of a parent alone is enough legally.
55 posted on 05/30/2007 1:04:49 PM PDT by mngran
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Responsibility2nd
If the parties were switched and Cheney and family were democrats

Yes, and Karl Rove's religious beliefs (or lack thereof), would be celebrated, but they aren't, and they've done a good job of balancing their beliefs with their career(s) and without it taking the spotlight off of what many supporters believe - I don't think I've met anybody truly alienated by Cheney's beliefs (although some do profess to being uncomfortable with his support of his daughter and such unions).
56 posted on 05/30/2007 1:18:17 PM PDT by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: mngran
Wow, I'm frankly just appalled by this

Standing up for what you believe will always appall someone.

And while having a child raised by lesbians might not be ideal, neither would having a child raised by old grandparents.

Actually we were just 39 at the time. We are 47 now and raising a 3yo granddaughter that has cerebral palsy.

I also have to point out that I think you're misinformed if you think a grandparent can simply go to court win custody of a child because they disagree with the lifestyle of the child's parents(s).

Apparently you don't understand the concept of a bluff. I know how hard it is to get custody of any child no matter how bad the child's circumstance. Two of my 5 children are adopted and even though their parents were abusive neglecting and in prison, it still wasn't easy.

We were bluffing and it worked. We have no regrets for preventing a child from being raised by lesbians even if one of those lesbians is our daughter and even though that child would have been our grandchild.

57 posted on 05/30/2007 1:38:22 PM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

Thank you for demonstrating that some people, gay or straight, should not be parents.....You are pathetic!


58 posted on 05/30/2007 1:47:41 PM PDT by rightwingfop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: 50mm

The term “real” is not used to describe the sperm / egg donor parents any longer. It is “biological” or “birth”, versus “adoptive” or simple “parents”. “Real” is who raised you, who loves you, who sacrificed for you.

I have friends who have “snowflake babies” — children born from a frozen (then thawed) egg/sperm donors, then implanted into my friend. She is the “adoptive” and “birth” parent because she carried the child in her womb, and she and her husband did a legal “embryo adoption” through the courts.

Personally, I don’t at all agree with creating life this way as a believer in Jesus Christ. I don’t judge them for their choice, but I wish they would have quietly and confidentially taken this unconventional route without ever revealing to their children how they were conceived, bought, paid for, and adopted. She’s the birth mom — she (and husband) are “real” parents. It is creating too much identity crisis and confusion for them, IMHO.

I am my four children’s “real” and “adoptive” mother, and they remember well their own “biological” or “birth” parents, as they call them.


59 posted on 05/30/2007 1:50:28 PM PDT by adopt4Him (The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mngran

well said — there isn’t. Grandparents have legal rights in most states for contact and visitation, but not to jerk a child out from a home that has immoral behavior, unless it shows harm to that child.


60 posted on 05/30/2007 1:52:55 PM PDT by adopt4Him (The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: gcruse; 1rudeboy
We haven’t even gotten to illegal aliens yet.

O ye of little faith.

61 posted on 05/30/2007 1:55:17 PM PDT by dighton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: rightwingfop
Thank you for demonstrating that some people, gay or straight, should not be parents.....You are pathetic!

Don't hold back, tell me how you really feel. After all it is all about feelings, what is right for the child is irrelevant.

Do you have any gay children? If not, then what you think you would or wouldn't do in this case is just speculation and irrelevant. It is amazing how pious one can be when they themselves have not been tested.

But do please enlighten me as to what you would have done and if you can, do try not to make it sound like a leftist gay pamphlet on the subject.

This should be interesting.

62 posted on 05/30/2007 2:12:16 PM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: stockpirate

“The paernts are the mother and whoever donated the sperm.”

Biologically, yes. Legally, no.

Somewhat off topic (A mini-hijacking of the thread!)

Medical science is already making so much of this type of arguement moot.

From The Baltimore Sun, May 17, 2007 (excerpt)...

A baby conceived from an egg donated by one woman and implanted in another may have no mother at all under Maryland law, the state’s highest court ruled yesterday.

Issued more than four years after the matter was brought to the Court of Appeals, the 4-3 opinion creates blank spaces under “mother” in the birth certificates of twins born in 2001 at Holy Cross Hospital in Silver Spring.

The man who arranged for the children to be born from his sperm and donated eggs, and the woman with whom he arranged to carry them, brought the case. The two wanted it made clear that she had no legal claims or responsibility for the children.

(Snip)

“What had not been fathomed exists today,” Chief Judge Robert M. Bell wrote for the majority. “The methods by which people can produce children have changed.”

The ruling is pioneering because of its basis on the state’s Equal Rights Amendment: The court found that paternity laws apply equally to men and women.

(End of Excerpt)

An attorney friend of mine states rulings such as this chances leading to “gestating” literally becoming much more of a “for profit” industry - since there will be no chance the “gestation/birth” mother will ever be considered the “legal” mother and, therefore, have no responsibility for the child. We shall see.


63 posted on 05/30/2007 2:31:13 PM PDT by DangerDanger ("I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism." - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: adopt4Him
We went the open adoption route and it's been great. I was the Lamaze coach for the birth mother for my older son's birth. The biological mother's parents have become defacto grandparents for my boys - something they otherwise would not have had. We spend holidays with the biological family and even attend church together on occasion.

We told each of our boys at a young age about the adoptions and this has made our family stronger. Our boys know they were wanted and chosen. They would have figured out the adoption themselves anyway since they resemble their biological mother's family and don't look like my wife and me at all.

I'm happy that you were able to adopt as well. I'm sure you have found it as fulfilling as me or you wouldn't have done it four times.

64 posted on 05/30/2007 2:43:46 PM PDT by 50mm (la prensa dos en traducir mi línea de etiqueta al inglés)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

Actually it has nothing to do with gay or straight in this case. It is simply a matter of a parent who is so much of a control freak as to deprive thier own child of the joy of parenthood. Your daughter would have been justified in moving away from you, birthing a beautiful child, and never even telling you about it. What really steames me is the self satisfied undertone you use when you tell your agonizing story. My prayers are with your daughter and the rest of your family whom I presume you have bullied as well.


65 posted on 05/30/2007 4:26:58 PM PDT by rightwingfop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: rightwingfop
You do not know anything about me to be making such disparaging remarks about my character.

Your daughter would have been justified in moving away from you, birthing a beautiful child, and never even telling you about it.

The fact that she and I are very close testifies that you are wrong about me.

What really steames me is the self satisfied undertone you use when you tell your agonizing story.

No, what really steams you is that not everyone buys into the idea of gay families and that some bonehead bigoted person like me was in a position to thwart one little part of your gay agenda.

66 posted on 05/30/2007 6:12:41 PM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: luckystarmom

However, I doubt that other grandchildren would be celebrated in such a emphatic manner.


67 posted on 05/30/2007 6:16:15 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Labyrinthos

Yes, the woman is doing what an aunt or a family friend who lives with the mother might do. Yes, she is parenting, but she represents a whole new kind of social relationship and it is a relationship I think immoral. What bothers me the most is that some are now saying that I ought not to say that it is immprtal, that I have no right to say this.


68 posted on 05/30/2007 6:22:59 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

You do not know anything about me to be making such disparaging remarks about my character.

I know that you dont think your daughter can be a good mother because of some silly predjudice so you decided for her that she will not be one.

The fact that she and I are very close testifies that you are wrong about me.

I’d love to know what she thinks about that statement.

No, what really steams you is that not everyone buys into the idea of gay families and that some bonehead bigoted person like me was in a position to thwart one little part of your gay agenda.

I said nothing about gay families...the only family I was discussing was yours.

I’ll bet you would have loved that baby...sorry you will never get the chance but I’m even more sorry for your daughter.


69 posted on 05/30/2007 6:47:24 PM PDT by rightwingfop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: 50mm

Yes, it has been amazing. But i adopted a sibling set of four (the girls came first — planned — and then one year later, the boys — not planned by me, only God).

So I’m keeping them altogether and life is awesome.


70 posted on 05/31/2007 8:33:06 AM PDT by adopt4Him (The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

They are not the parents.
All that fake artifical donor stuff does not make parents.


71 posted on 05/31/2007 8:38:02 AM PDT by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
Wow... all I can say is wow... You sat your child, who you claim to love, down and blatantly threatened her with stealing her child from her because you don’t agree with her lifestyle. The hatred there is alarming. Having been in a similar situation with my own family, I feel I should let you know what exactly your daughter felt when you told her that.
It’s hard to put into words the soul wrenching agony such statements from a parent put a child through, but I will attempt to explain. Imagine a white hot knife, the largest knife you’ve ever held. Now, imagine someone stabbing you with that blade, then twisting it violently before ripping it out. That’s what it feels like to a child every time they hear ‘I love you, but not what you do.’ What those words really mean is ‘I love you, even though you’re not good enough for me.’ I can only imagine that such an outright threat would be even worse. You celebrate your daughter not having children, I would bet your daughter cries that her parents would make such a hate filled statement to her.
72 posted on 06/03/2007 9:14:09 PM PDT by Realityisreality
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: general

I do have to wonder what these people have to say to the countless adopted children out there. All the ones that are now in good, loving homes. I’d love to see them go up to a friend of mine and try to tell her the kid she fought so hard to adopt and loves with all her heart isn’t hers just because she didn’t give birth to him.


73 posted on 06/04/2007 7:55:13 AM PDT by Realityisreality
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Realityisreality
I can only presume that since this is your first post here, that you are either a lurker or a troll and most likely are gay.

Imagine a white hot knife, the largest knife you’ve ever held. Now, imagine someone stabbing you with that blade, then twisting it violently before ripping it out.

A little melodramatic don't you think. My daughter hates drama queens.

That’s what it feels like to a child every time they hear ‘I love you, but not what you do.’

BS. If loving a person is conditional to approving all of their actions then you could never really love anyone, because it is impossible to be in complete agreement with every action. Unconditional love requires us to separate the person from their actions.

I would bet your daughter cries that her parents would make such a hate filled statement to her.

I have no doubt that she agonized and cried over this. But she is a big girl and able to defend herself. In all of the negative posts to me about this, not one even hinted at what would be best for the child or how the child will feel growing up with two mommies. No, every single one of them dealt with only how my daughter or how they themselves felt.

My concerns were only for an unborn child, yours is only for the right to do whatever we want with no thought for consequences.

74 posted on 06/04/2007 2:03:55 PM PDT by Between the Lines (I am very cognizant of my fallibility, sinfulness, and other limitations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

Hmmm...
Maybe The White House has listened to Howard Stern:
“Lesbians mean big ratings!!!”


75 posted on 06/04/2007 2:06:24 PM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777
Fact is, two lesbians are going to raise a child that will have instilled in him that homosexuality is a normal and accepted lifestyle.

What's that to you? Why is that any of your damned business?

76 posted on 06/04/2007 2:14:18 PM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: jude24

My comment:
“Fact is, two lesbians are going to raise a child that will have instilled in him that homosexuality is a normal and accepted lifestyle.”

Your reply:
“What’s that to you? Why is that any of your damned business?”

My reply, to your reply:
HOMOSEXUALITY IS A DEVIANT, IMMORAL LIFESTYLE! Boom!


77 posted on 06/04/2007 2:24:37 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777
HOMOSEXUALITY IS A DEVIANT, IMMORAL LIFESTYLE!

So what? There's a lot of "deviant" things that consenting adults do. Why is it any of your damned business what they do?

78 posted on 06/04/2007 2:26:13 PM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: jude24
“What’s that to you? Why is that any of your damned business?”

I sense hostility, anger and a bit of emotional distress.

Normalizing such behavior as is the case with the Cheny’s, causes young people to become deceived into thinking this behavior is ok, natural and accepted.

It is not.

Homosexual behaviors lead to social decay just as drugs, pedophilia, adultery and do forth.

Someone like the Vice President should keep such things under wraps within his household, not promoting it as a social norm.

For instance, would you care if our next president was someone who engaged in polygamy at one time? Even though he does not practice it now, he still is an open supporter of polygamy.

In fact, at a commencement speech full of young people, hints to the crowd that taking on two wives is really ok and that society will soon accept the practice, so be diligent and keep up the good work!

That’s absurd. The same goes with two homosexuals getting married and raising a child.......breeds social decay.

79 posted on 06/04/2007 2:37:23 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

Comment #80 Removed by Moderator

To: servantboy777
I sense hostility, anger and a bit of emotional distress.

Yeah - because I'm sick and tired of the Taliban wing of the Republican party, trying to be the Morality Police.

Homosexual behaviors lead to social decay just as drugs, pedophilia, adultery and do forth.

Homosexuality, adultery, and drug use are not in the same class as pedophilia. "One of these is not like the others."

81 posted on 06/04/2007 2:53:59 PM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: elitemicro
Because innocent children are involved. I don’t buy the liberal talking point that two S&M leather daddies can raise up a young boy without screwing up his mind. It’s just common sense.

And S&M leather mommies and daddies will screw up kids just as surely. Your point being?

Any time the homosexual degenerates try to hurt impressionable children by immersing them in the homosexual lifestyle, people of faith take exception.

What about the "divorced lifestyle"? My Bible condemns divorce. It condemns alcoholism. It condemns moneygrubbing. It condemns a whole lot of things that aren't the government's business - even if it's "for the children."

82 posted on 06/04/2007 2:56:18 PM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

Oh, please! Give the Bush bashing a rest! The White House is simply acknowledging that the Cheneys have a new grandchild. I’m sure the Cheneys are happy to have him, regardless of the lack of marital status of their daughter.


83 posted on 06/04/2007 3:01:16 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines; A. Pole; little jeremiah; jpsb

I’m just guessing that this is the first semi-American Administration where this crap has happened. Contemporary semi(or pseudo)-american culture is vile.


84 posted on 06/04/2007 3:03:27 PM PDT by ProCivitas (Truth and Justice are Conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines
Cheney isn't the slightest bit out line with White House policy, which has never expressed the slightest animus towards homosexuals, homosexuality, or the non-biological partner in a gay couple with a child acting as a parent to the child.

There is a White House policy that legal marriage should not be restricted to one man and one woman, and there's no evidence Cheney doesn't support that.

There is also a Solicitor General view, presumably approved by the White House, that the Constitution doesn't mandate civil rights (marriage or otherwise) for homosexuals per se. However, that view doesn't arise out any policy animus towards homosexuals, but out of a generally strict-constructionist view that it is undemocratic to read substantively new rights, plainly alien to the framers' intent and understanding, into the Constitution and thus out of the public debate. It is the same view that would seek to strike down Roe and seek to preserve the death penalty against those who have the Supreme Court ban it by judicial fiat.

Generalization beyond those narrow policies was never justified. And it's not like there's going to be any change in the next Republican administration. McCain, whose gay ex-staffer died heroically on Flight 93, Giuliani (enough said), Thompson (long time actor), and Romney (globe trotting corporate leader)? Not a one of them cares a whit for the anti-gay agenda.
85 posted on 06/04/2007 3:17:54 PM PDT by only1percent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jude24

And I (and plenty of others) are sick and tired of the lemming like march off the cliff led the so-called moral relativists (and dragging the rest of us along with you). Your use of the word “Taliban wing” of the Republican party is very telling.

All we want is to get the government OUT of the business of promoting sexual deviance and indeed, forcing it down out throats via judicial activism and legislative kowtowing to the homosexual activists and their assistants.

A very few generations ago all the homosexual agenda didn’t exist, laws prohibiting sodomy, sexual deviance, and contributing to the deliquence of a minor were all on the books, and no one was compared to the Taliban.

This Taliban reference outs you as either a social liberal, liberal-tarian, or homosexual rights purveyor.

And, btw, there IS relevance in comparing homosexuality to pedophilia, as one third or more of all child molestation is same sex.

Nice try.


86 posted on 06/04/2007 3:34:27 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: jude24

“Why is it any of your damned business what they do?”

Because they make it our damned business. If they kept it behind closed doors, no one would know or care. But since they don’t keep it to themselves, and have publicly stated that they are out to change the entire world to suit them, they have MADE it our business.

As if you didn’t know that. You’re either part of the problem, or very, very young.


87 posted on 06/04/2007 3:36:35 PM PDT by little jeremiah (Leave illusion, come to the truth. Leave the darkness, come to the light.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: tutstar

read later


88 posted on 06/04/2007 4:01:08 PM PDT by tutstar (Baptist Ping list - freepmail me to get on or off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

I don’t think the White House recognizes homosexual unions and parenting. The policies of the Bush Administration have stood for marriage between one man and one woman. However, it’s a standard policy to release pictures of the new grandkids. That was all they were doing. I do feel sorry for the child because the child was purposefully deprived of a mother and father, and that is just not fair, imo. Plus, both these women are not his parents. A child has one mother and one father. In adoption, a new mother and father may take on the role of parenting, but that is a different situation than two women or two men. This child will also have a distorted view of morality. I am hoping Dick Cheney will be a father like figure to this little boy if his health holds up. Dick Cheney seems to support homosexual marriage, though, and it is most likely the child will grow up supporting it too.


89 posted on 06/04/2007 7:44:26 PM PDT by Pinkbell (Hunter/Thompson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Between the Lines

My God have mercy on that lovely, poor little baby.


90 posted on 06/04/2007 7:49:18 PM PDT by AmericanInTokyo (I propose amending the "Pray For Bush" FR link into "Pray For Bush To Grow A Brain". Muchas Gracias.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jude24
Well alrighty then.

First off, you don’t know me.....I am neither Republican nor Democrat.

I am conservative and I support traditional values. If we had more morals Mr.jude24, our country would not be experiencing the horrific social downturn we are now witnessing.

All sorts of stuff that once was considered wrong, deviant, taboo are being taught in schools, blatantly parroted on evening television and radio every day.

No thanx, you can have the anything goes / if it feels good do it / I’m good-your good mentality.

I’d prefer a more traditional existence.

Oh and by the way Jude24, I find it quite ironic your screen name considering your defense of Lesbian lovers raising children. Ever read the book of Jude?

Back up to JUDE 1: verse 4 and read on to JUDE 1 verse 24.

This tiny lil book is one of the least known in the bible, yet describes the deviant lifestyles your attempting to defend......good luck to ya.

Argue with the creator, these are HIS words not mine. It is HE whom you are at odds.

91 posted on 06/04/2007 8:30:50 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777; OrthodoxPresbyterian
No thanx, you can have the anything goes / if it feels good do it / I’m good-your good mentality.

Never said that. What I said is that there are a lot of things Christians consider immoral that are none of the government's business.

Don't quote proof-texts to me - you will look in vain in the entire New Testament for anything remotely suggesting that the government is intended to be the enforcer of public morality. Just because I do not buy into your Focus on the Family propaganda doesn't mean I don't take Christianity and Christian morality seriously - but those are questions for internal catechesis, not external kulturkampfs.

92 posted on 06/04/2007 8:41:57 PM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: jude24
“What about the “divorced lifestyle”? My Bible condemns divorce. It condemns alcoholism. It condemns moneygrubbing. It condemns a whole lot of things”

Why yes the bible does. They are indeed just as bad in God’s eyes.

Are you attempting to justify wrong behavior with wrong behavior?

Let me further quantify, we are all guilty. No one is without some sort of skeleton.

With that said, do we continue a downward slide into a society that allows anything? Not no, but heck no.

We learn from our mistakes and attempt to live better lives.
Adultery is wrong, abortion is wrong, homosexuality is wrong, drunkenness is wrong.

Am I the morality police for pointing out what is harmful to the family, harmful to society and what has been described for thousands of years as wrong?

93 posted on 06/04/2007 8:52:17 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: jude24
“Don’t quote proof-texts to me - you will look in vain in the entire New Testament for anything remotely suggesting that the government is intended to be the enforcer of public morality”

Your all over the place. Who is talking about the government?

It appears as if you feel I’m judging you or someone you love. I am not.

I am just exhausted with the anything goes slide America finds herself.

I don’t want homosexuality taught as an accepted lifestyle to my child by the liberal education establishment nor the liberal MSM.

Again, I didn’t make these things up. You attack me as if I’m the one who wrote the bible.....argue with God.

94 posted on 06/04/2007 9:03:45 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777
Am I the morality police for pointing out what is harmful to the family, harmful to society and what has been described for thousands of years as wrong?

No. Your problem is when you start demanding the government do something about it.

95 posted on 06/04/2007 9:04:03 PM PDT by jude24 (Seen in Beijing: "Shangri-La is in you mind, but your Buffalo is not.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: jude24
Man....you way off.

I want the government to stay out of as much as possible.

With that said, would you like to see gay marriage legal?

How about polygamy? What’cha think about legalization of abortion or drugs?

If the answer to any of those is Yes...then you and I are worlds apart.

96 posted on 06/04/2007 9:09:33 PM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

Comment #97 Removed by Moderator

To: 50mm
That being said, the caption under the picture of Cheney's grandchild could have said "Cheney celebrates, along with his daughter's partner, the birth of Mary's child..."

There's a sensible suggestion.

98 posted on 06/04/2007 10:24:19 PM PDT by tuesday afternoon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Daddy


99 posted on 06/05/2007 12:31:56 AM PDT by philetus (Keep doing what you always do and you'll keep getting what you always get.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: servantboy777
“Don’t quote proof-texts to me - you will look in vain in the entire New Testament for anything remotely suggesting that the government is intended to be the enforcer of public morality””

By the way, the bible does in fact command us to obey our government and the law of the land as long as it does not circumvent God’s law.

The bible is clear on the governments role in protecting society against moral decay..........and not just remotely as you are suggesting.

100 posted on 06/05/2007 6:14:27 AM PDT by servantboy777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-103 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