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

Skip to comments.

Will Democrats End Marriage As We Know It?
Townhall.com ^ | August 1, 2012 | Ken Blackwell

Posted on 08/01/2012 9:07:09 AM PDT by Kaslin

When the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) passed in Congress in 1996, the vote was bi-partisan and overwhelming. In the House, the tally was 342-67. Only the farthest left of Democrats and a handful of Republicans voted against it. A majority of Democrats supported marriage. In the Senate, the vote was even more lopsided and bi-partisan, 85-14. Again, most Democrats backed marriage. In both houses of Congress, the DOMA passed with such strong margins that President Clinton could clearly see the measure had better than "veto strength." That is, if he had vetoed the Defense of Marriage Act, Congress could have passed it over his veto. That would have required 67 votes in the Senate and 292 votes in the House. Bowing to the inevitable, Clinton signed the bill.

Now, President Obama has refused "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed" if he disagrees with them.

He announced early in his administration that he would not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. He has done everything he can in the last three and a half years to dismantle the law. It is a process not unlike termites eating away at the foundations of a house. Until just a few weeks ago, he apparently hoped that the law would collapse as he systematically undermined its foundations. It didn't. So President Obama, prompted no doubt by Vice President Biden's blurted out support for counterfeiting marriage, has "evolved."

Even the most committed advocates of evolutionary biology would deny that you can see evolution proceeding in just sixteen years. Nonetheless, Mr. Obama's position on marriage has changed. Or, more accurately, we might say his true position has come out. In 2008, he told Pastor Rick Warren that he believed "marriage is between a man and a woman. And God is in the mix." Which one moved?

Democrats have announced they will put same sex marriage in their platform when they meet in convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. This, in a state that voted last May to sustain true marriage. North Carolina voters joined 31 other states in backing true marriage. The vote was a stunning 61%-39%. That was up from the last reputable public opinion poll which had showed 55% supporting marriage to 39% opposed.

North Carolina's marriage referendum was part of a nationwide pattern. True marriage typically does better at the ballot box than in public opinion surveys. Ohio, Wisconsin, and Florida are battleground states this year. In Ohio in 2004, 62% of voters backed true marriage. That helped to carry the Buckeye State and the election for George W. Bush. In Wisconsin in 2006, 59% of voters backed marriage. Every county in the Badger State except ultra-liberal Dane County (Madison) voted for marriage. And that was in the same year when Nancy Pelosi's liberal cohorts swept into office. Florida saw marriage voters break the 60% threshold to lock marriage into the state constitution.

If the Democrats' platform embraces this radical proposal, they will be voting to end marriage, not change it.

If you say a man may marry a man, and a woman may marry a woman, then on what principled basis can you say three men may not marry? George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley advocated polygamy at the Newseum in 2008--and was wildly cheered by the mostly liberal audience. As a professor of constitutional law, Turley knows that same-sex couplings will lead to polygamy--

"and I'm for that," he says.

In every statewide referendum on this issue, black and Hispanic voters provided an indispensable source of support for true marriage. These voters reject the idea that same sex marriage is a civil rights issue. The mantle of civil rights must not be seized by those who would deny Americans their civil right of marriage. In order for this to remain a civil right, there must be true marriage left in society.

Mae West once said: "Marriage is a great institution, but I'm just not ready for an institution." It's too bad Mae West is not sitting on the Democratic Platform Committee.

She had a keener understanding of true marriage than many of today's evolved politicians.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: culturewar; democratscandals; doma; homosexualagenda; marriagelaws; moralabsolutes; obamalegacy; samesexdivorce; samesexmarriage; sexpositiveagenda; smashmonogamy

1 posted on 08/01/2012 9:07:15 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

No, but marriage as we knew it, has already ended in many places. Heterosexual couples will still get married.


2 posted on 08/01/2012 9:13:02 AM PDT by stuartcr ("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

In another generation or two, “Progressives” will demand a law forcing clergy to allow them to “marry” their factory built, robotic sex partners.


3 posted on 08/01/2012 9:14:32 AM PDT by Iron Munro ("Jiggle the Handle for Barry!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Once you “re-define” marriage, there is no way to stop marriage from continual re-definition. First polygamy, then Polyamory (group marriages). Turley is right, there is no logical or legal way to stop that train once it veers off the tracks. But, as Turley also reveals, that is the purpose of this whole thing. Gays don’t want to re-define who CAN get married; they want to redefine marriage. First thing to go, faithfulness.


4 posted on 08/01/2012 9:17:17 AM PDT by LibertarianLiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Social conservatives ended marriage a long time ago, when they gave control of it to government in exchange for a tax break.

Once government gets into the business of handing out benefits based on an individual's legal status, it will always attempt to redefine the legal meaning of that status for its own purposes.

5 posted on 08/01/2012 9:17:38 AM PDT by Mr. Jeeves (CTRL-GALT-DELETE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Will Democrats End Marriage As We Know It?

As long as they control "public education," they will succeed.

6 posted on 08/01/2012 9:24:02 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The Slave Party Switcheroo: Economic crisis! Zero's eligibility Trumped!! Hillary 2012!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas; stephenjohnbanker; DoughtyOne; Gilbo_3; NFHale; Impy; LMAO; ...
RE :”Now, President Obama has refused “to take care that the laws be faithfully executed” if he disagrees with them.
He announced early in his administration that he would not enforce the Defense of Marriage Act. He has done everything he can in the last three and a half years to dismantle the law. It is a process not unlike termites eating away at the foundations of a house. Until just a few weeks ago, he apparently hoped that the law would collapse as he systematically undermined its foundations.

Barney Frank was on Hardball yesterday arguing with Matthews of all people about this. Fwank was arguing that the DNC taking up an ‘marriage equality’ (same sex) official party plank was ‘no big deal’ because Obama has already come out on the issue this year. Matthews who is a supporter of the idea was worried it could hurt Dems in some voting areas.

Barney Frank has got to be one of the most unattractive and unpleasant spokesmen that Dems have, and he represents the homo-, err LGBT crowd on TV. Every show including Hardball with friend and ally Matthews Fwank goes into a Fwank annoying girly-like gay hissy fit looking stupid again, Either he is on drugs or he has untreated mental issues.

We need Fwank to be the official nation gay (LGBT) exhibit model for kids and young adults.

7 posted on 08/01/2012 9:51:51 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Marriage, as in Holy Matrimony, is a sacrament. It is divine in God’s eye between a man and a woman. No matter what homosexual couples do, it can NEVER be considered Marriage. (I can call my dog a cat but he will never be a feline.)
The Gay/Lesbian community will have to accept that homosexuality will never be accepted. We’ve been tolerant as in ‘Love the Sinner. Hate the Sin’. Man would have to rewrite the word of God to accomodate this unnatural behavior.
Their behavior demonstrates that this isn’t about equality. They want extra special treatment as a protected special interest.
Someone should get government out of Marriage altogether. Everyone should be subject to the same Civil Union laws.
Isn’t there a ‘Solomon’ out there that would promote this?


8 posted on 08/01/2012 10:03:12 AM PDT by griswold3 (Big Government does not tolerate rivals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Look at the response to the Chick-Fil-A fiasco. They are overwhelmed with customers today. And the bakery in Colorado that refused to do a wedding cake for a homosexual marriage has seen his business double.

The people have spoken. The silent majority is making it clear that they are there.

Today the Homosexuals have realized the consequences of pursuing their own “Bridge Too Far.”

The sleeping giant has awakened. This will have political ramifications far beyond Chick-Fil-A, et al.

This just may be the end of the forward march of the homosexual agenda for the foreseeable future.

And then there is November. :-)


9 posted on 08/01/2012 10:07:47 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr

Marriage as we knew it in ended in 1973.

What we have now is gay marriage for heterosexuals, and although I oppose legalizing pretend marriages for same sex couples, it’s important to acknowledge that traditional marriage (permanent, legal enforcement of fidelity, no remarriage with a living spouse) is already illegal in all 50 states.


10 posted on 08/01/2012 10:24:51 AM PDT by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

In today’s America, we are not allowed to do our own math. The mandate is retardation and mental illness.


11 posted on 08/01/2012 10:26:39 AM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

Barney thinks he has come out the closet, when he is a rapist who has not fully publicly yet praised his own corruption and rape of the US tax payers.

That is, right there, the hypocrisy of the politician, but also his mental illness... because like a Jack the Ripper who thinks he is a good guy during the day, so are all these dangerous people covering up themselves in self belief of feeling persecuted.

They poke themselves in the eyes to blindness and they accuse those who want them to stop. It is murder-suicide.


12 posted on 08/01/2012 10:32:06 AM PDT by JudgemAll (Democrats Fed. job-security Whorocracy & hate:hypocrites must be gay like us or be tested/crucified)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JudgemAll
RE :’Barney thinks he has come out the closet, when he is a rapist who has not fully publicly yet praised his own corruption and rape of the US tax payers.

I am assuming you are talking about Fannie and Freddy.

Normally I cant stand O Reilly BUT watching him yell at, accuse and lecture Mr Sissy-pants Hissy-fit Fwank was a pleasure, and great entertainment. I never seen anyone else do that. Fwank will have a fit anyway so why not give him hell.

13 posted on 08/01/2012 10:39:29 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

“Look at the response to the Chick-Fil-A fiasco. They are overwhelmed with customers today. And the bakery in Colorado that refused to do a wedding cake for a homosexual marriage has seen his business double.

The people have spoken. The silent majority is making it clear that they are there.

Today the Homosexuals have realized the consequences of pursuing their own “Bridge Too Far.”

The sleeping giant has awakened. This will have political ramifications far beyond Chick-Fil-A, et al.

This just may be the end of the forward march of the homosexual agenda for the foreseeable future.

And then there is November. :-)”

I’m with you all the way on this, brother - I do not for a minute believe in some endless agenda driven by Dems and gays that will continue on and on into a distant future.

Historically, movements reach their heights, and then comes the decline. We are seeing signs of this all around us today.

Why then are so many still pessimistic, still imagining the inevitable march into the next decades of all this leftover 1990s craze which is still with us, and which we now see falling apart? 2 decades from now it will be clear that what seemed indestructible (liberal rainbow army) was in reality only a house of cards...


14 posted on 08/01/2012 10:46:38 AM PDT by scottjewell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“The vote was a stunning 61%-39%.”

If you told someone in 1992 that by 2012 only 61% of NC voters would think that state recognition of marriage should only be between a man and a woman, they would be more stunned I reckon.

Freegards


15 posted on 08/01/2012 10:47:01 AM PDT by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianLiz
From Barack Obama's mentor, Bill Ayers:

No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen (September 11, 2001 - NY Times)

He also writes about the Weathermen's sexual experimentation as they tried to ''smash monogamy.'' The Weathermen were ''an army of lovers,'' he says, and describes having had different sexual partners, including his best male friend....And as for settling into marriage after efforts to smash monogamy, Ms. Dohrn said, ''You're always trying to balance your understanding of who you are and what you need, and your longing and imaginings of freedom.''

Smash monogamy is the name of the game. In Texas Same Sex Marriage is not recognized, so lesbians come here and try to find an activist judge to grant them a Same Sex Divorce.

It's not about being married or "no longer living in sin in the eyes of God" by shacking up. It's about subverting the establishment.

16 posted on 08/01/2012 10:47:12 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Eric Holder's NAACP rally against the voter ID laws required the press to bring govt issue photo ID.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I believe the Democrats are painting themselves into a corner, as it were. They are going to either stand up for gay rights and include the issue in their platform, or they are going to reluctantly back down. Either way, they are screwed. They shouldn’t have offered it in the first place. If they proceed, they will alienate huge numbers of traditionalist voters in the Democrat party, like Blacks and Hispanics, and an untold number of their so-called Working Class voters. If they back down, they will upset a lot of their core supporters.

I PREDICT: Ultimately, they will decide that it is too dangerous, and blame the “Religious Right” for being too intolerant and forcing them to take it out of their platform. It may seem unlikely, but Republicans will take the blame in the media for an entirely Democrat decision. The left and their propaganda organ will have no compunctions about pushing the narrative, because they are liars anyway.


17 posted on 08/01/2012 10:50:36 AM PDT by webheart (King of the Run-On Sentence)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scottjewell

The important, and yet largely ignored, canvass on which all this is being painted is that every single time this issue comes to a vote of the people, homosexual marriage is defeated.

Every. Single. Time.


18 posted on 08/01/2012 10:57:40 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Iron Munro
In another generation or two, “Progressives” will demand a law forcing clergy to allow them to “marry” their factory built, robotic sex partners.

(Science in Seconds ^ | July 13, 2012 | Rheanna Sand)

But if robots are to ever become androids, like the "fully functional" Data from Star Trek TNG, they are going to have to be touch-responsive. But making an entire robot that responds to human touch is a herculean task, so a graduate student from Japan has simplified matters by inventing - get this - an emotionally responsive set of robo-buttocks...

19 posted on 08/01/2012 10:58:08 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Eric Holder's NAACP rally against the voter ID laws required the press to bring govt issue photo ID.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

It’s treated as if it is a big demand issue, but homosexuals are 1-2% of the general population (higher in prisons and the media). Not everyone will enter into a marriage. So we are looking at 0.5%-1% of the population who are affected yet the lavender mafia in the media newrooms push it in the faces of the 99%.

And parents do NOT want to confuse their children as to what is natural.


20 posted on 08/01/2012 11:03:38 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (Eric Holder's NAACP rally against the voter ID laws required the press to bring govt issue photo ID.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: griswold3
Marriage is an entirely religious construct. As such any attempt by government to regulate,tax, penalize, define, or limit marriage is illegal under the first amendment of our constitution. If one can find a church that will marry you to your dog, boyfriend or your houseplant it is between you and God.

He will deal with you in due time.......

If you want to share benefits or an estate, swear out legally binding contract that addresses those issues.

21 posted on 08/01/2012 11:15:21 AM PDT by Species8472 (Stupid is supposed to hurt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Then I guess it’s already ended.

Why 1973?


22 posted on 08/01/2012 11:22:55 AM PDT by stuartcr ("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf; sickoflibs

” The people have spoken. The silent majority is making it clear that they are there.

Today the Homosexuals have realized the consequences of pursuing their own “Bridge Too Far.”

The sleeping giant has awakened. This will have political ramifications far beyond Chick-Fil-A, et al.

This just may be the end of the forward march of the homosexual agenda for the foreseeable future.”

Homos are indoctrinating our kids through their good pals...the public schools, and the MSM. They don’t back down, and they believe they are winning the war on heterosexual America. I wish I could be as optimistic as you are, but I am not. We have to fight them every way we can, because they will not relent.


23 posted on 08/01/2012 12:19:33 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

I’m not optimistic for the long run. Heck, when GWB was elected in 2000 I said all we did was put off the inevitable for another four years. Same thing here.

In the end, the Bible says it will get worse before it gets better. In fact, it says it will be the worst time in the entire history of mankind. When I first read that I imagined some horrible, but distant, future. I don’t see it as all that distant now. And I learned from how fast it took the German Jews to go from prosperity to gas chambers.

Bottom line: The homosexual lobby jumped the gun, but they are not done. Fortunately, this is one of their “two steps back” moment, as the arrival of AIDS on the international stage was.


24 posted on 08/01/2012 12:23:22 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker; cuban leaf; sickoflibs
Homos are indoctrinating our kids ...We have to fight them every way we can, because they will not relent

yesSir, theres apt to be a lull in the war after this CFA era battle...but the queer zombies will always be back...

i continue to be labeled a 'hater' and 'intolerant' and a 'bigot' because i simply refuse to compromise on my God-Given principles to myself and, more importantly, for the guidance of my children...

baby girl starts school next week...out here in podunkville, i dont anticipate any queer agenda, but God will have to save the individuals that might attempt to push it in her direction...

individual queers, kill yerselves if ya like, but leave me and mine out of it, drop the agenda or expect payback in spades...

25 posted on 08/01/2012 12:50:12 PM PDT by Gilbo_3 (Gov is not reason; not eloquent; its force.Like fire,a dangerous servant & master. George Washington)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LibertarianLiz

Undefining, and undermining, marriage as an institution is the goal all along.

And, along the way, if you can get Christian beliefs criminalized, all the better.


26 posted on 08/01/2012 12:52:49 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3; cuban leaf; sickoflibs

” i continue to be labeled a ‘hater’ and ‘intolerant’ and a ‘bigot’ because i simply refuse to compromise on my God-Given principles to myself and, more importantly, for the guidance of my children...”

Count me in as a hater too...I hate leftist homosexual indoctriation of children, and young adults.

” baby girl starts school next week...out here in podunkville, i dont anticipate any queer agenda, but God will have to save the individuals that might attempt to push it in her direction...”

Better keep an eye on the curriculum. I don’t care how far out in podunkville you are. 90% of the books are leftist, and many of them are pro-homo.

The goal of homos are to destroy the institution of marriage, and the past 10 years, they are winning.
If they get near your kids (curriculum) smash theirs!


27 posted on 08/01/2012 1:12:43 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3; stephenjohnbanker; cuban leaf
RE :”i continue to be labeled a ‘hater’ and ‘intolerant’ and a ‘bigot’ because i simply refuse to compromise on my God-Given principles to myself and, more importantly, for the guidance of my children..”

The state lets you have children with your intolerant views? I am surprised that the public schools head doctors have not interrogated your kids and used the results to have them carted away to some tolerant adult couple, preferably two men :)

28 posted on 08/01/2012 1:24:01 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

LOL!


29 posted on 08/01/2012 1:27:34 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker; Gilbo_3
Children are our future. We must make sure they are ‘educated’ to support the correct policies and set of universal rights and global responsibilities.

Gilbo should be able to see his own kids, supervised of course.

I know a fellow whose wife accused him of child abuse for spanking the kids (they had ADD which makes it a family court crime) and so she got full custody and he got ordered to make child support payments and alimony to her and but he got supervised visits, 5 states away from where they lived. His life is ruined.

30 posted on 08/01/2012 1:37:08 PM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
If the Democrats' platform embraces this radical proposal, they will be voting to end marriage, not change it.

Destruction of traditional marriage and family has always been a part of the Marxist worldview.The traditional family is bourgeois and deprives the worker of revolutionary consciousness.

Secular humanists want the boundaries of marriage to be expanded to create more potential for human growth and self actualization.

31 posted on 08/01/2012 1:42:48 PM PDT by mjp ((pro-{God, reality, reason, egoism, individualism, natural rights, limited government, capitalism}))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Then I guess it's already ended. Why 1973?

Between 1967 and 1973, all states instituted unilateral divorce without damages (basically annulling all existing marriage contracts). There is no other form of contract that is construed to be terminable at will by one party with no recourse to the other party.

In 1973, the Supreme Court ruled (in the same term that gave us Roe v. Wade) that marriage did not impose any obligations on a man not also borne by single men with regard to fatherhood, thus rendering a man's marriage promise to support all children born to his wife during their marriage and not otherwise nugatory.

Laws against adultery were already in decline by the 1960s, and by 1973 there was essentially no enforcement anywhere in the United States.

Thus, the legal pillars of "traditional marriage" (permanence, fidelity, unique obligations to children) were all destroyed by 1973.

Since 1973, heterosexuals have enjoyed a novel and unique form of "marriage", which confers certain tax and property benefits but is not otherwise like traditional marriage in any respect.

No wonder homosexuals want in on it.

32 posted on 08/01/2012 2:41:14 PM PDT by Jim Noble (Diseases desperate grown are by desperate appliance relieved or not at all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Well put.


33 posted on 08/01/2012 2:45:38 PM PDT by ex-snook (without forgiveness there is no Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

ok


34 posted on 08/01/2012 4:01:15 PM PDT by stuartcr ("When silence speaks, it speaks only to those that have already decided what they want to hear.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
making an entire robot that responds to human touch is a herculean task, so a graduate student from Japan has simplified matters by inventing - get this - an emotionally responsive set of robo-buttocks...

Butt Pirates will be lined up six times around the building and a mile down the street when these go on sale.


35 posted on 08/01/2012 4:21:16 PM PDT by Iron Munro ("Jiggle the Handle for Barry!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

“Barney Frank has got to be one of the most unattractive and unpleasant spokesmen.....”

Isn’t that the truth! Every time I’m unpleasant someone calls me on it, how come that old fool skates? And I’m a lot more attractive....but that wouldn’t take much, would it?


36 posted on 08/01/2012 7:03:40 PM PDT by AuntB (Illegal immigration is simply more "share the wealth" socialism and a CRIME not a race!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

I’m sorry about the man you mention, but he is collateral damage in the mind of America’s liberal majority. And I say majority, because look at the Senate, the presidency, and the courts.


37 posted on 08/02/2012 4:00:49 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Past is prologue: The American people again let us down in this election cycle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
RE :”I’m sorry about the man you mention, but he is collateral damage in the mind of America’s liberal majority. And I say majority, because look at the Senate, the presidency, and the courts

I Should mention that they had lots of problems that caused the marriage deterioration that were not all her fault, or his either. Like having three kids in a row they really couldnt afford and having trouble paying the bills and the kids were always sick or getting into trouble as the marriage fell apart.

Ironically they were both evangelical outreach Christians, obviously they didnt convince anyone as their marriage fell apart.

But the endgame was she plotted to destroy him by kidnapping the kids to another state and going to a family court there and accusing him of child abuse and the other states family court helped her destroy his life.

As I have said many times. family courts are like Islamic justice where the females (typically) have all the rights and there is no due process, no judicial review, the process is held in secret and the courts can simply throw the parent in jail for anything. The family court takes away/suspends the fathers's drivers licence then throw him in jail for not showing up at a family court hearing, or if he does show up they throw him in jail for a driving there with a suspended licence.

38 posted on 08/02/2012 5:08:23 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is still a liberal. Just watch him. (Obama-ney Care ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Gilbo_3; cuban leaf; sickoflibs

” the queer zombies will always be back..”

Zombies....LOL....an apt description if there ever was one.


39 posted on 08/02/2012 9:25:37 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: MrB; All

” Undefining, and undermining, marriage as an institution is the goal all along.

And, along the way, if you can get Christian beliefs criminalized, all the better.”

The Homo Lobby is intent on completing the following:

1) Co-opt the public schools....they have in a big way.

2) Co-opt the print and video media....they have.

3) Destroy Christianity in the U.S.....they have thus far failed here, but with the left, the MSM, and the public school curriculum in their pocket, it is a daily battle.


40 posted on 08/02/2012 9:30:29 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs

” As I have said many times. family courts are like Islamic justice where the females (typically) have all the rights and there is no due process, no judicial review, the process is held in secret and the courts can simply throw the parent in jail for anything. :

You are spot on the money here!


41 posted on 08/02/2012 9:35:12 AM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (God, family, country, mom, apple pie, the girl next door and a Ford F250 to pull my boat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

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