It depends on what the meaning of lust and sin is.
Posted on 05/18/2008 10:26:54 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Clinton Sits Through Sermon About Adultery
May 18, 2008 12:42 PM
ABC News' Eloise Harper Reports: When things couldn't be looking worse for Sen. Hillary Clinton's bid for the presidency in 2008, as her rival Barack Obama closes in on gaining enough delegates to secure the nomination, the former first lady attended a church service in Bowling Green, Ky., Sunday featuring a sermon about lust and adultery.
The hour-long sermon focused on the sin of committing adultery -– as outlined in Mathew 5:27-32.
Clinton, D-N.Y., has often said her faith pulled her through the difficult time when her husband, former President Bill Clinton, had an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.
Paul Fryman of the State Street United Methodist Church asked the congregation, "How is your commitment level in your marriage this morning?’
He spoke about lust and the sin of cheating on your partner. Clinton looked straight ahead as the man spoke about the theme of the sermon
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.abcnews.com ...
So her sitting though a sermon on sexual sin isn't that earth shattering.
Now if the sermon was about the sin of Pride, that's a whole different thing
Was her lesbian friend with her??
Pray for W and Our Troops
TOOOOOO funny.
Wonder if she felt the sermon was specifically for her benefit?
Bill's adultery isn't an event, it's a lifestyle. Long before Monica, and presumably ever since.
Monica's just the one he got caught with. Memo to self: be careful where you deposit certain body fluids.
It depends on what the meaning of lust and sin is.
The Secret Service took the pastor into custody, at his own church.
Hillary sold her soul for political power — she was an long-term enabler and help-mate to Bill’s fornicating lifestyle, and she actively worked to threaten and destroy the women Bill screwed around with..... and any honest person would have been rid of the scumbag Bill many years earlier.... or, if against all divorce (which is mainly a Catholic position and not too common anymore) then Shrillary should have refused to have anything to do with public defenses of her husband’s indefensible conduct.
She may not have been the one cheating on the marriage (though we really don’t know), but she most certainly was an active even if unhappy enabler.
Just remember what she did in the 1992 campaign, when she helped to foist the scumbag on the entire nation. I wish these Clintonistas would GO AWAY.
She got plenty of other things to explain to her maker
Huma whispers in Hillary’s ear when it becomes known what the sermon is to be about:
“Whatever you do, DON’T fall asleep. There’s cameras in here.”
The real story is that the media discovered Bill committed adultery and dared to talk about while Hillary is running for President. It’s been off the table for months. They must really want Obama.
There is a lesson to be learned from the story of the Rev. Rob Schenck. And from the story of Patricia Mendoza. And from the story of William J. Kelly. It is that criticizing the President of the United States can be hazardous to your freedom. An improper word at a Christmas Eve service can get you detained by the Secret Service. Declining to shake Mr. Clinton's hand at an impromptu stop can prompt an interrogation of your "sexual orientation," and court charges. And an inappropriate question at a town meeting can win you twenty-seven hours in police custody, shackled in handcuffs and leg irons. ....
The Schenck incident occurred at Christmas at the Washington National Cathedral. The Washington Post reported Rev. Schenck's account of it, that "while waiting to receive communion, he leaned over the altar rail toward the president's nearby seat and quietly told Clinton: 'God will hold you to account, Mr. President.'" Apparently the comment was intended in reference to the president's notorious veto of the partial-birth abortion ban. There was no further interaction between the two men, but Rev. Schenck was nevertheless physically detained by the Secret Service while leaving the cathedral, had his wallet searched and his driver's license extracted, and during this search was told he could not contact a lawyer. One of the agents "quoted the president as having complained . . . that Schenck had 'said words' to him."{3} Not surprisingly, a Secret Service spokesperson later vouched for the appropriateness of the agents' actions.{4}
One sometimes wonders about the sanity of the secret service as well as other govt. types.
Most of which I wouldn’t give a bucket of spit for.
What’s really funny are all the Obamarats now disavowing the Clintons and even bringing up his Lewinsky episode, and her tolerance of his adultery for her own reasons. They say that they knew it along (if true, it just goes to show that they’ll overlook anything to advance Marxism), or that they were tricked (if so, they’re too stupid to live, much less govern or even vote). What’s really funny, is that you can almost hear the screeching of the brakes in their little brains just before they get to the bottom-line point of the Republicans being right all those years—I always wish I was face-to-face with them at that point, because it would feel SO good to repeat, over and over, “We TOLD you so! We TOLD you so!”
You couldn’t have said it more perfectly. She was and still is an enabler. She rode his coattails thinking the Presidency was HERS. They are BOTH losers and only care about themselves.
Better put some ice on that...
Is this common? (I ask being Jewish and finding that most Christians find it surprising that our Saturday morning services are considered short if they take less than three hours. Of this, the rabbi's sermon or talk given by some guest usually doesn't exceed 20 minutes.)
ML/NJ
. . . . if you don't actually, a-a-h, you know, .. . .
God does indeed have a sense of humor.
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.