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

Skip to comments.

Federal judge strikes down Oregon's ban on gay marriage
Fox News ^ | 5/19/2014 | Fox News

Posted on 05/19/2014 12:28:06 PM PDT by freedumb2003

Edited on 05/19/2014 12:31:07 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

A federal judge has struck down Oregon's same-sex marriage ban, saying it is unconstitutional.

U.S. District Judge Michael McShane threw out the voter-approved ban Monday.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; US: Oregon
KEYWORDS: catholic; homosexualagenda; lawsuit; michaelmcshane; oregon; ruling; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-125 next last

1 posted on 05/19/2014 12:28:06 PM PDT by freedumb2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

So many “judges” have their heads in a dark & smelly place.


2 posted on 05/19/2014 12:30:15 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Only MASSIVE civil disobedience will stop these damn judges from CONTINUING to legislate from the bench on social issues.


3 posted on 05/19/2014 12:30:19 PM PDT by ZULU (https://www.facebook.com/freejustina)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Government has got to get out of the marriage business sooner rather than later. They have nothing but contempt for the institution and are utterly incapable of defining it.


4 posted on 05/19/2014 12:30:40 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Appointed by Obama, and according to Wiki his “domestic partner” is Michael Hogan.


5 posted on 05/19/2014 12:32:09 PM PDT by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Anything we want has to go through 526 layers of governmental approval, and can be halted by anyone at any layer.

Anything they want gets approved once by some judge, and bang! it's decided forever. "Settled Law"

6 posted on 05/19/2014 12:32:13 PM PDT by Steely Tom (How do you feel about robbing Peter's robot?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I do believe all these judges interfering to knock down traditional marriage policies in one state after another is being coordinated from the White House. It’s a calculated war on the will of the people and on the rights of the states designed to impose gay marriage everywhere by judicial fiat.


7 posted on 05/19/2014 12:34:33 PM PDT by WashingtonSource
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Wickedpedia:

District Court Judge Michael McShane
Nomination to U.S. District Court[edit]

On September 19, 2012, President Obama nominated McShane to serve as a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Oregon, to the seat vacated by Judge Michael R. Hogan who took senior status on September 24, 2011.[3] On January 2, 2013, his nomination was returned to the President, due to the sine die adjournment of the Senate.

On January 3, 2013, he was renominated to the same office. His nomination was reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee on March 7, 2013, by voice vote.[4]

The Senate confirmed his nomination on May 20, 2013, by voice vote. He received his commission on May 30, 2013.

Personal[edit]

McShane is openly gay,[5] and he is the first openly gay federal judge in Oregon.[6] His partner is Gregory Ford.[1]

Well, knock me over with a feather ........ when Democrats can’t get around the law with a judge, as here, they want to change the Constitution, as with the `Citizens United’ case where the SCOTUS disappointed them.


8 posted on 05/19/2014 12:35:45 PM PDT by tumblindice (America's founding fathers: all armed conservatives)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cementjungle

Judge that struck down the law wants to marry his boyfriend.
So he changed the law. Exact same thing happened in California. Queer judges should not be allowed to rule on cases like this. What a crock of horse manure. Judicial tyranny of the highest order.

“McShane is openly gay,[5] and he is the first openly gay federal judge in Oregon.[6] His partner is Gregory Ford.[1]

McShane sits on the board of St. Andrew Nativity School, an inner city middle school for disadvantaged youth. In addition, he teaches at Lewis & Clark Law School.[2]”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_J._McShane


9 posted on 05/19/2014 12:35:52 PM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

10 posted on 05/19/2014 12:37:15 PM PDT by BenLurkin (This is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire; or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

This decision signals the death of freedom because in this case Oregon’s constitutional amendment which was passed by the voters in an initiative petition was struck down by a judge in a non-adversarial lawsuit. What happened is that the Democrat Governor and Attorney General of Oregon colluded with the gay activists and refused to defend the Marriage Amendment which was passed by the voters of Oregon. Then the corrupt judge refused to allow the National Organization for Marriage to defend the law. At this point this was no longer an adversarial proceeding and the judges ruling should thus have no weight.


11 posted on 05/19/2014 12:38:44 PM PDT by dschapin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

Yeah, no reason to recuse himself... Sheesh.


12 posted on 05/19/2014 12:38:56 PM PDT by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Federal judge strikes down Oregon's ban on gay marriage

Fixed.

13 posted on 05/19/2014 12:39:12 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

So much for Rand Paul’s States Rights approach to solving this problem.


14 posted on 05/19/2014 12:42:13 PM PDT by SoConPubbie (Mitt and Obama: They're the same poison, just a different potency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenLurkin

That is 100% true.

There is not a single argument made for gay "marriage" that cannot also be made for polygamy/polyandry or for the most part, pedophilia.

15 posted on 05/19/2014 12:44:33 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (Fight Tapinophobia in all its forms! Do not submit to arduus privilege.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: tumblindice

McShane is openly gay.. Hey, just like the man who appointed him! (Obama).


16 posted on 05/19/2014 12:46:32 PM PDT by CivilWarBrewing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: WashingtonSource

They all have their marching orders from Barry Bathhouse. Democrats play follow the leader. Mindless robots that have no mind of their own.


17 posted on 05/19/2014 12:47:35 PM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Gay rights groups previously said they've collected enough signatures to force a statewide vote on gay marriage in November. But they said they would discard the signatures and drop their campaign if the court rules in their favor by May 23.

Why vote when you can have one leftist judge overrule an entire state?

18 posted on 05/19/2014 12:47:54 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Haven't you lost enough freedoms? Support an end to the WOD now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Government has got to get out of the marriage business sooner rather than later.

That is a stupid remark, that doesn't even make sense.

The libertarians created that straw dog out of thin air to create a distraction to use among gay marriage opponents.

Either gay marriage is legal, or it is illegal, if you don't care about complying with the law yourself, then don't, you can call whatever you want to "marriage" for yourself.

19 posted on 05/19/2014 12:50:32 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Ted Cruz and Mike Lee-both of whom sit on the Senate Judiciary Comm as Ginsberg's importance fades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Another judge that needs removal by the legislature. Unbelievable.


20 posted on 05/19/2014 12:55:02 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Elections have consequences. The judge is a pervert what else can we expect?


21 posted on 05/19/2014 12:55:51 PM PDT by kenmcg (b)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WashingtonSource

I believe you may be correct.


22 posted on 05/19/2014 12:55:58 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

” Queer judges should not be allowed to rule on cases like this. “

That has been a problem with America for a long time is that we allow judges and voters who have something to gain from their decisions or votes. We see this with gay judges and Pro Gay Marriage judges that are allowed to decide cases.

We have atheist judges that are allowed to decide Religious Freedom cases and minority judges deciding on Affirmative Action cases.


23 posted on 05/19/2014 12:57:01 PM PDT by Oliviaforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Not so.

Government initially got into the marriage business because it generated license fees, blood testing fees and the like. Most of this came about in the later part of the 19th century.

Before that, it was churches which recorded marriages and the government simply recognized them.

It may not work that way now with all the faux churches performing faux marriages, but it couldn't possibly work any worse than the road we're heading down.

24 posted on 05/19/2014 12:57:12 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: hal ogen

another day, another judge imposes homosexual marriage on yet another state.

I think every single court case since last year’s Supreme Court cases on homosexual marriage, has resulted in ruling that states affected must allow homosexual marriage.


25 posted on 05/19/2014 12:58:01 PM PDT by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
U.S. District Judge Michael McShane is a VILE curse on our nation.
He should pay the price for his Satanic ruling!
26 posted on 05/19/2014 12:58:19 PM PDT by Yosemitest (It's Simple ! Fight, ... or Die !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

If I were a betting man I would bet a 6-3 vote next year giving with the US Supreme Court destroying the institution of marriage. Alito, Scalia, and Thomas dissenting. I think both Kennedy and the worthless Roberts will vote for the destruction of marriage as we know it. We know Kennedy will. He gave the country homo “marriage” when he ruled sodomy was legal in Texas. And if Roberts is a closet-case himself, like most believe, no doubt he goes right along with the other radicals. Thank George W. Bush, the RINO, with choosing a man with 3 years experience as a judge, for not just a US Supreme Court Judge position, but the chief justice, spitting in the face of Alito and Scalia, and Thomas. Thanks little george, you worthless POS.


27 posted on 05/19/2014 1:01:34 PM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

It’s unconstitutional? What right does that fall under? “You hereby have the right to marry anything you want”? Funny how they treat the 2nd Amendment like it doesn’t exist, but somehow can mention the constitution for rights that don’t.


28 posted on 05/19/2014 1:09:22 PM PDT by GrandJediMasterYoda (Hitlery: Incarnation of evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cementjungle
Appointed by Obama, and according to Wiki his “domestic partner” is Michael Hogan.


"Whut?" --Saul Tigh
29 posted on 05/19/2014 1:11:53 PM PDT by RandallFlagg (Uninstall Fascist Firefox. Get Pale Moon.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Presumably if a Republican appointed these judge positions, they could in 4 years find same sex marriage unconstitutional and ban it. Who would stop them?


30 posted on 05/19/2014 1:12:23 PM PDT by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet

His picture was enough for my gaydar screen to light up.

The Constitution doesn’t mention marriage anywhere. Therefore, it seems to me that the question of marriage laws should be covered by the tenth amendment.


31 posted on 05/19/2014 1:12:37 PM PDT by beelzepug (You can't fix a broken washing machine by washing more expensive clothes in it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

On September 19, 2012, President Obama nominated McShane to serve as a United States District Judge for the United States District Court for the District of Oregon.

McShane is openly gay, and he is the first openly gay federal judge in Oregon. His partner is Gregory Ford

32 posted on 05/19/2014 1:12:43 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Still can’t find the article in the Constitution that gives a Federal judge authority over a sovereign state.


33 posted on 05/19/2014 1:14:33 PM PDT by SampleMan (Feral Humans are the refuse of socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Isn’t it nice that gay judges will now be allowed to change the US Constitution to enable gay marriage.


34 posted on 05/19/2014 1:17:30 PM PDT by Williams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum announced earlier this year that she wouldn’t defend the law because it violates federal equal-rights protections as interpreted by last year’s Supreme Court decision.

Several lawyers on both sides of the issue say the lack of opposition will almost undoubtedly lead McShane to strike down Oregon’s constitutional prohibition.

McShane also became known around the courthouse for having a temper. He could be particularly tough on lawyers he saw as unprepared. One prosecutor privately calls him an “equal-opportunity screamer” given to chewing out hapless attorneys.

For years, McShane collected religious icons and was frequently given pictures of St. Michael.

“I don’t think he’s a practicing Catholic,” says Bergstrom. “But I think it informs his life. ... I think he would say he considers himself a Catholic.”

With one longtime ex-partner, McShane adopted a young boy, now 20, who had come from an abusive home. He’s now helping rear the 13-year-old nephew of his current partner, Gregory Ford, who has gone back to school to become a nurse.

McShane’s sexual orientation may have helped him get a foot in the door to be considered for a federal judgeship. The Obama administration has pressed for a more diverse federal judiciary. The five finalists for the Eugene judgeship that McShane won included three women, one an African-American.

there’s been some grumbling about McShane’s involvement in the case.

John Eastman, a constitutional law professor and chairman of the National Organization for Marriage, an anti-gay marriage group, questions whether McShane has a conflict.

“The question is not his sexual orientation,” says Eastman, “but whether he is situated identically to the plaintiffs and will benefit from the exact relief he provides to them.”

In other words, McShane could also get the right to marry his partner if he strikes down the Oregon prohibition on gay marriage.

http://www.oregonlive.com/mapes/index.ssf/2014/04/gay_marriage_openly_gay_judge.html


35 posted on 05/19/2014 1:18:09 PM PDT by kcvl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
Government initially got into the marriage business because it generated license fees, blood testing fees and the like. Most of this came about in the later part of the 19th century.

How many times does that have to be corrected? The marriage license is many, many centuries old about 8 centuries, and was mandatory in Massachusetts since the 1600s for example, Thomas Jefferson bought one for his marriage in Virginia where the law was that it had to be purchased in the county the bride lived in, George Washington paid for the marriage license for his favorite nephew, the federal government was passing legislation on marriage in the 1780s, and 1790s.

Before that, it was churches which recorded marriages and the government simply recognized them. It may not work that way now with all the faux churches performing faux marriages, but it couldn't possibly work any worse than the road we're heading down.

Couldn't work any worse? Mormons, Mosques, cults, gay churches, animal cults, satanic cults, defining legal marriage on their own?

Either marriage is legal, or not, and that has always been so, whether the controlling authority was Greece, or Rome, or tribal, or Islam, or the Catholic church, or English law, or whatever, if you don't care if your marriage complies with law, then don't, you had that option 500 years ago, and a 100 years ago, and you have it today.

Do you really think marriage is forbidden to the non religious in America, and that Mosques and churches will be handling divorce law?

36 posted on 05/19/2014 1:22:09 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Ted Cruz and Mike Lee-both of whom sit on the Senate Judiciary Comm as Ginsberg's importance fades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

I’m far more surprised that Oregon had such a law than a judge struck it down...


37 posted on 05/19/2014 1:22:47 PM PDT by Wyatt's Torch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

No, all we need is for Tea Party people to win Nebraska and Mississippi and Ted Cruz as president. You know, more people who are not even talking about all this crap, but will reverse everything bad with 51 R’s in the senate. Where’s your faith in the political process?


38 posted on 05/19/2014 1:23:15 PM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

Gay Sharia courts. We do not have to recognize the rulings and imposed marriages of the gays. People can associate however they want, but to pervert words of special association like marriage to anything is a total Orwellian travesty.

We have a problem however when government is inclined to sue or prosecute for revenues and pure prosecutorial excuse sakes.

Note how the media is spinning this ruling.


39 posted on 05/19/2014 1:24:25 PM PDT by lavaroise (A well regulated gun being necessary to the state, the rights of the militia shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WashingtonSource
7 I do believe all these judges interfering to knock down traditional marriage policies in one state after another is being coordinated from the White House. It’s a calculated war on the will of the people and on the rights of the states designed to impose gay marriage everywhere by judicial fiat.

18 states + Wash. D.C. already have homosexual marriage.

Federal district judges issued stays on ...

UT 1/06/2014
OK 1/13/2014
KY 2/12/2014
VA 2/13/2014
TX 2/26/2014
TN 3/14/2014
MI 3/21/2013
OH 4/04/2014
ID 5/13/2014
OR 5/19/2014

40 posted on 05/19/2014 1:28:28 PM PDT by MacNaughton (Psalms 11:3 When the foundations are being destroyed, what can the righteous do?”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Steely Tom

All we need is 38 states to approve Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments tm, and all our problems are solved. No, no, no, a judge can’t rule the amendments unconstitutional, because the amendments will say they can’t.


41 posted on 05/19/2014 1:29:33 PM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

“Why vote when you can have one leftist judge overrule an entire state?”

And when that leftist judge is a fag himself you have all angles covered.


42 posted on 05/19/2014 1:30:03 PM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SoFloFreeper

But he won’t be removed by the legislature. So what should be done since that is a nonstarter?


43 posted on 05/19/2014 1:32:10 PM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Viennacon

Republican appointed judges never do that.


44 posted on 05/19/2014 1:34:38 PM PDT by demshateGod (The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: kcvl
Attorney General Ellen Rosenblum announced earlier this year that she wouldn’t defend the law because it violates federal equal-rights protections as interpreted by last year’s Supreme Court decision.

This isn't really all the judges fault.

It's not hard for a judge to make a decision in favor of one side, when the other side refuses to even show up to present a defense of the law.

That seems to be the case in many of these being overturned

45 posted on 05/19/2014 1:41:35 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: MacNaughton

Would be interesting to see how many of those states have AGs that refused to defend the State Law, as was the case in this one


46 posted on 05/19/2014 1:43:43 PM PDT by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: SoConPubbie
So much for Rand Paul’s States Rights approach to solving this problem.

Rand Paul has called for an end to opposing gay marriage, and social issues in general, including abortion.

He wants us to make him president, where he would oversee federal law and regulations about these issues at the federal level, for instance gay marriage in the military, federal employment, and immigration, and as we can see already, how he would use the presidential soapbox to influence public opinion, already he is working on conservatives to accept the left's vision.

47 posted on 05/19/2014 1:45:32 PM PDT by ansel12 ((Ted Cruz and Mike Lee-both of whom sit on the Senate Judiciary Comm as Ginsberg's importance fades)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
There has always been a Justice of the Peace type option for the non-religious. You pointed out several examples yourself even if the specific people involved were religious.

There is also a large difference between the government as a party to a marriage contract as in the case of bonds, banns, etc. and the government as the sole legitimate recorder of marriages as we have now. Yeah, I know, churches still perform and record marriages, but they have no legal force other than as back-up evidence to the government records.

This will at least be the case until some judge declares a Muslim marriage to four wives to be a civil right under Sharia law. And it is only a matter of time before it is coming once fudgepacker marriage is declared co-equal.

What legal basis is there to stop now?

48 posted on 05/19/2014 1:46:02 PM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

Here is an undesputable fact. If Barry Bathhouse has appointed a Federal judge he has told that federal judge to strike down any state constitutional bans on sodomite “marriage”. If the state attorney general is a democrat he has also been told not to enforce any state constitutional ban if it is challenged in court. Only a few State AGs that are democrats have the integrity and decency to fight for the people and uphold their oath of office. 99% cave toObama. That is exactly what happened in California when Prop 8 was appealed to the US Supreme Court. Governor Ahnuld, and Attorney Gen Jerry Brown refused to represent the people. They hung them out to dry and the Supreme Court would not hear the case. So the queer judge that struck down the will of the people got his way and millions and millions of Californians that had voted down homo “marriage” were disenfranchised. Their vote meant noting. Told to move one, one queer judge has more right than they do. Votes mean nothing in the country anymore. The crooked Supreme Court will always side with a judge over the people.
Today the democrat State Attorney General in Oregon said he would not fight for the people over this radical judge. In otherwords democrats could care less what a law says. They do what they feel like doing and to hell with the people or anyone else. They get their marching orders from the fraud in chief, who refuses to obey the laws of the land each and every day, with an assist from his partner in crime Eric Holder.


49 posted on 05/19/2014 1:47:34 PM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Williams

Next to come will be horse breeders. There’s a lot of horses in Oregon and if the judge just happens to be a horse breeder and wants to marry that pretty little filly he’s been eye-balling, he will rule that it’s perfectly legal for anyone to marry a horse.

Folks it’s coming. If marriage is not the union of one man and one woman, then it’s nothing. Anything goes. Marry your chickens, a half dozen goats, your sister, your buick, your rabbit. Hell, marry anything you want to marry. Who’s to tell you no?


50 posted on 05/19/2014 1:52:25 PM PDT by NKP_Vet ("It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died;we should thank God that such men lived" ~ Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-125 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