Posted on 04/06/2008 10:16:50 AM PDT by TightyRighty
those kind of people want to tear down all morality and laws they can.
I've often found the most self righteous voices stem from those with a contrary record.
You can go to www.rogerballen.com and go to galleries | platteland and see this picture and some other remarkable pics. Looks like a day on the set of a George Romero film LOL.
I'd love to hear an elaboration on that.
By no means do I support these actions of the two, but it's not our concern........
Why not? First, forget that this has anything to do with sex and tell me why someone gets to break a claerly established law. Second, why doesn't a society get to set these parameters? You're from Wisconsin...are you saying that vote back in '06 was a completlely illegitimate exercise, like having a referendum on what shirts a guy wears in his house?
Unless you're perfect in your marriage record and perfect with that of your offspring, nobody deserves to make this their business. The glass house occupants are barking like a stone throwing mob here.
That's a lie.
In fact, (and you can snicker all you want or think I'm a fundie extremist all you want) but that's a lie straight from Hell.
The idea that one has to walk on water before they can say something is wrong (or even illegal) is designed to make people feel guilty for having standards. Well, I'm not going to feel guilty because someone is foolish enough to treat me like the Church Lady because I know guys shouldn't jump in the sack with their offspring.
Try applying your "if you're perfect" standard to other areas. Ever said something cruel to one of your kids or spanked them too hard? Guess child abuse isn't your business anymore. Ever punched in and not gotten around to working for 15 minutes or so? Guess you can't ever say shoplifting or bankrobbing are wrong.
But, less than a week later, Samantha, then nine, accidentally revealed her mother’s secret, blurting out to Jenny’s mum: “Mummy’s happy now she’s slept with Grandpa.” Knowing her mum would not be able to keep her secret, Jenny was forced to tell her husband. He was disgusted and refused to see her again. Meanwhile John confessed their incestuous relationship to his shocked wife, Sarah*, 56. Incredibly, she suggested that Jenny came to live with them and share John with her.
Words fail me...and I write for a living.
That’s two ugly people and being nuts on top of being bone deep ugly..........
Unthinkable 40 years ago, defining DEVIANCY down with each passing moment...so today it becomes....SO WHAT....tomorrow it becomes NORMAL and soon thereafter, it becomes a "PREFERRED LIFESTYLE" as the HOMOSEXUAL lifestyle enjoys today.
The flavor of this thread by most posts had more to do with making fun of their looks, stupidity, and background for the most part. You and I see a serious component to it. If you want to see how tragic the state of families are here in Wisconsin, the hospital birth statistics indicate that single mothers now outnumber married ones. Kids in school have the most messed up families imaginable. Three to four marriages is not uncommon. The topic of conversation with my daughter’s friends is which parent they feel like living with this week. Most of them in the end find themselves living with grandparents. A huge portion of the girls are pregnant before graduating high school. The funniest thing is seeing court ordered child support requested from boys in high school..........They do not learn however. They keep this crap up well into their 30’s. Then history repeats itself.
It took me a moment to figure out why those kids are so ugly but that is funny!!
Four reactions: 1. So, if one were outraged about a child abuse case that would be really hypocritical unless one spent a large amount of time conducting parenting classes or something? Can only child welfare employees condemn child abuse because the rest of us aren't putting in 40 hours a week stopping it?
2. How do you know we don't? As is always the case, the "don't be judgmental" call is itself an expression of hypocrisy.
3. Don't you get it? People doing what you ask would be shouted down by a thousand people just like you telling them that problem X is much more serious than divorce, it's none of our business, etc.
4. Let's use your standard: Unless you're "perfect in your marriage" and in your efforts to promote solid marriages, what business do you have telling someone else what they should be saying about marriage? A standard that holds that we are all sinners but does not apologize for sin is the only standard that works, and that's because that's how God set it up.
I've often found the most self righteous voices stem from those with a contrary record.
From the standard you've put forward here, it would seem that your definition of self-righteous is anyone who objects to a moral failing without being perfect. That definition is way, way off.
As far as a contrary record goes, I've had 15 years of faithful marriage. Nice try.
And her father is also her kid’s father and grandfather. This family tree looks more like a bush. Which is a theory why incest is illegal and taboo in almost all societies. It makes it too difficult to figure out family relationships.
It’s not about you. It’s the collective “You”. I’ve been married once, and continue to be for going on 26 years. I think thou protests too much........
Well, at least in this little ditty, it’s all legit. The guy is married to a widow and the widow’s daughter is no relationship to the guy’s father.... unlike this gross-out story.
How is this little girl ever going to explain it to people when she grows up? And as for genetics, maybe the child will have no problems, but there could be some to HER children, if I am correct. Of course, someone told me recently that all the stuff about having retards if you have a child with your relatives is a bunch of hogwash.
All I can say is, genetics or not, Leviticus is good enough for me in this regard.
They look like Bill Clinton’s kids.
OMG - that’s hysterical.
I realize that movie stars don’t look as good without all their makeup and so on, but I guarantee you that I know many, many real people that look WAY better than that lady does (just the weight alone), without any make-up or any special “help.”
I think the person making the comment meant to say that they really aren’t the best examples of their demographic, no matter how you slice it.
What ever happened to the Danny Williams claim? I think that was the Clinton/hooker love child’s name. You know, the hooker Bubba used to score with when he would go “jogging”.
Where did you get that little meter? If that is a real number, where are the stats to show when and where the attacks were perpetrated?
I have a good reason for asking. A prof of mine said there were more deaths from peanut allergies than from terrorism. I challenged it and then he started adding conditions (e.g. U.S. only and Islamic and can’t be in a warzone, etc. etc.).
I thought that was underhanded. I checked and saw that 100 deaths per year are attributed to peanut allergies in the U.S. alone, but unlike some people, I think many of the injuries done by terrorism are almost as bad as death (blindness, paralysis, etc.)
Looks are the first thing to go. Unfortunately I guess me and my circle of friends seem to have been in the front of that line.
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.