Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Forced Into Fatherhood?
Faith and Family ^ | 5/27/2010 | Danielle Bean

Posted on 05/27/2010 10:50:08 AM PDT by markomalley

How much say should a man have in the decision to become a parent?

For Catholics, the answer is easy: A man who doesn’t want to be a parent should not be having sex. That’s where the “freedom of choice” comes in. But the immorality of our secular, pro-abortion culture makes the question significantly more complicated than that.

This month, Elle magazine publishes a story about Greg Bruell, a man who made a pact with his girlfriend that if she became pregnant, she would have an abortion. She had already done that once, but when she became pregnant a second time, she refused to have an abortion. She kept the baby and sought child support.

Infuriated about the “miserable betrayal,” Bruell told Hedrick it was over between them, for good. He believed she’d deliberately gotten pregnant. Then, two months later, as he was leaving a session with his personal trainer, he was served with a lawsuit demanding child support for his unborn child. That’s when Bruell called Mel Feit, a founder of the National Center for Men (NCM), and volunteered to become the next poster boy for male reproductive rights ...

Feit’s list of grievances range from sexist social standards—why should men still be expected to foot the bill on dates? Why is crying or showing weakness verboten for them?—to what he considers discrimination enforced by the state: men’s lack of reproductive rights combined with unfair child support laws. “Reproductive choice isn’t a fundamental right if it’s only limited to people who have internal reproductive systems,” Feit says. “If it only applies to women, it’s a limited right and that weakens it.” In his view, Planned Parenthood’s motto—“Every child a wanted child”—should apply to both people who make the baby.

Undoubtedly, an argument in favor of paternal “freedom of choice” puts abortion proponents in a tricky spot. For example, the article highlights the work of Dalton Conley, the dean of social sciences at New York University, who in his zeal for fathers’ rights dares to argue that “If a father is willing to legally commit to raising a child with no help from the mother, he should be able to obtain an injunction against the abortion of the fetus he helped create.”

Wow. I would guess that most advocates of “reproductive rights” would have difficulty embracing that idea.

If you read the whole sad story, you will find that ultimately Bruell dropped his lawsuit against his girlfriend. He appears to love his family and didn’t have it in him to pursue litigation against them to make a political point.

Let’s pray that human emotion and natural attachment might always score such a quiet victory over attempted perversion of the family unit.


TOPICS: Catholic
KEYWORDS: abortion; childsupport; moralabsolutes; prolife
Much simpler if people just follow the teachings of the Church.
1 posted on 05/27/2010 10:50:08 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: markomalley

It infuriates feminists, but...

Men must always take the superior and higher higher ground over women in these reproductive rights battles.

If a man fails to act responsibly, he must suffer the consequences.


2 posted on 05/27/2010 10:54:29 AM PDT by Responsibility2nd (PALIN/MCCAIN IN 2012 - barf alert? sarc tag? -- can't decide)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The feminist (abortionist) movement has greatly harmed women.

This is an example, as is the manner in which Chinese and Indian girls are aborted/exterminated.


3 posted on 05/27/2010 10:54:42 AM PDT by Retired Greyhound
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

Don’t want babies? Have a vasectomy or, at the least, use a condom.


4 posted on 05/27/2010 10:55:36 AM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

which church?


5 posted on 05/27/2010 10:55:51 AM PDT by consultant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
This month, Elle magazine publishes a story about Greg Bruell, a man who made a pact with his girlfriend that if she became pregnant, she would have an abortion. She had already done that once, but when she became pregnant a second time, she refused to have an abortion. She kept the baby and sought child support

What a POS.

6 posted on 05/27/2010 10:58:07 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Something is seriously wrong when the .gov plans to treat citizens worse than they treat terrorists)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The last two sentences said it all. How I wish my husband’s family followed that. I agree with you added comments about following the teachings of the Church as well. However, once you have lawyers involved, trust usually goes out the door, even where families are involved.


7 posted on 05/27/2010 11:01:49 AM PDT by Paved Paradise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb
Don’t want babies? Have a vasectomy or, at the least, use a condom.

How about keeping the pants zipped?

8 posted on 05/27/2010 11:02:35 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Centurion2000

>>What a POS.<<

Which one?


9 posted on 05/27/2010 11:03:38 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am inyenzi on the Religion Forum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

>>How about keeping the pants zipped? <<

That is a totally foreign concept in some people’s minds.


10 posted on 05/27/2010 11:04:29 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am inyenzi on the Religion Forum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
That is a totally foreign concept in some people’s minds.

Thus, my comments at post#1

11 posted on 05/27/2010 11:05:01 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
“Reproductive choice isn’t a fundamental right if it’s only limited to people who have internal reproductive systems,” Feit says

Huh?
Mr Feit needs to get off the crack. This fool wants to be given the rights to force a woman to commit abortion? Hey, Feit, if you don't want to have a child, don't have sex. No one is forcing ya to have sex with anybody.

12 posted on 05/27/2010 11:07:50 AM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: markomalley; netmilsmom
>>How about keeping the pants zipped? <<

What if you are married? Should you keep your pants zipped then? Your wife gets pregnant, immediately divorces you, so she can hook a bigger fish, and wants child support for twenty years.

In the current feminist court environment, child support is a lucrative business. That's why she didn't have the abortion. She is obviously not opposed to abortion. She talked to a lawyer, did the math, found out how much money was involved and how easy it is to get it and went for the money.

Women know what they are doing. They can manipulate their way into getting pregnant especially in marriage.

Keeping it zipped is fine if you are 15. But as an adult in adult situations, it is not as simple as that. It is more complicated and a certain amount of agreement and trust is required on both sides.

Just my opinion

13 posted on 05/27/2010 11:17:40 AM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 240B
It is more complicated and a certain amount of agreement and trust is required on both sides.

And if that trust is not there, both women and men better keep those pants zipped whether you're 15 or 51.

14 posted on 05/27/2010 11:23:25 AM PDT by Tamar1973 (Freedom of the Press?! I need Freedom FROM THE PRESS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 240B; netmilsmom
What if you are married? Should you keep your pants zipped then? Your wife gets pregnant, immediately divorces you, so she can hook a bigger fish, and wants child support for twenty years.

Not the scenario in the story, is it?

Keeping it zipped is fine if you are 15. But as an adult in adult situations, it is not as simple as that. It is more complicated and a certain amount of agreement and trust is required on both sides.

Goes back to my comment in post #1, though, doesn't it?

And if kids aren't trained that way from the start and don't see parents model it, actually living family life according to the teachings of the Church will seem even more anachronistic than it does now.

15 posted on 05/27/2010 11:25:13 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb

“Don’t want babies? Have a vasectomy or, at the least, use a condom.”

The best is to not have sex. Anything else can fail.


16 posted on 05/27/2010 11:28:16 AM PDT by imskylark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: 240B

“A man who doesn’t want to be a parent should not be having sex.”

Only men are told to forgo sex, or get sterilized if they are certain they don’t want a kid. Women of course, aren’t held to accountable as a man. If a woman says she never wants to be a parent, she still retains the right to a sex life, but she is allowed to abort for any reason.


17 posted on 05/27/2010 11:28:29 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

The poor sap, doesn’t he understand? Only men can be held strictly accountable for the consequenses of sex. Women are free to behave as they please, and opt out of parenthood on a whim.

It’s like a fun little jet, where only the females seats will eject. So of course she doesn’t mind trying some aerobatics!


18 posted on 05/27/2010 11:33:24 AM PDT by DesertRhino (I was standing with a rifle, waiting for soviet paratroopers, but communists just ran for office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino
she still retains the right to a sex life

That is because the man is always Guilty in the case of a pregnancy. Look at the posts even here, Well, you shouldn't have been having sex, is a common response.

Ok, I'll just move to a mountain top and become a hermit. I can't trust my wife/girlfriend, I can't trust condoms, so no sex for me.

Because if she does become pregnant, even if it is with a turkey baster, it is all my fault. I will be on the hook for twenty years (with no recourse) and the woman can watch Oprah and eat chocolates on the couch while collecting a check every month.

Why doesn't the ‘keep it zipped’ mantra suddenly not apply to the woman?

19 posted on 05/27/2010 11:42:15 AM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 240B

>>and wants child support for twenty years.<<
Wouldn’t you be supporting your child anyway?


20 posted on 05/27/2010 11:45:54 AM PDT by netmilsmom (I am inyenzi on the Religion Forum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 240B; netmilsmom
Why doesn't the ‘keep it zipped’ mantra suddenly not apply to the woman?

I usually say keep the legs closed myself. But I'm old fashioned and like to see women in skirts.

21 posted on 05/27/2010 11:46:15 AM PDT by markomalley (Extra Ecclesiam nulla salus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe

No one forces many women to have sex either but they reserve the right to kill thier child, he was just asking for an equal opportunity to become a murderer.


22 posted on 05/27/2010 11:52:01 AM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

“If a woman says she never wants to be a parent, she still retains the right to a sex life...”

See, in the feminist and liberal mind, this is EQUAL rights!

Remember, some animals are just more equal than others!


23 posted on 05/27/2010 11:55:07 AM PDT by ExTxMarine (Hey Congress: Go Conservative or Go Home!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

Isn’t it funny how pro-child murderers think it is a woman’s right to kill her child but get all exercised if a man wants a woman to kill her child.

That reaction alone should make it obvious that child murder is wrong because if it was right it would be right no matter who suggested or did it.


24 posted on 05/27/2010 12:03:33 PM PDT by tiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: tiki
No one forces many women to have sex either but they reserve the right to kill thier child, he was just asking for an equal opportunity to become a murderer

I know what he is asking. I know abortion is evil whether instigated by the man or the woman. On the other hand, no man can be given the power to dictate what happens to someone else's body, especially if it involves procedures that may cause that someone to lose their lives(as plenty of women have done while attempting an abortion).
How would he like it if some woman that he knocked up then abandoned, went to court and demanded that she be given the right to have him castrated to stop him from further impregnating other women? Hah! Thought so!

25 posted on 05/27/2010 12:03:41 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
OH my goodness. You really are out of the loop.

Brief synopsis of how child support works.

The courts can legally take(garnish) up to %50 percent of your salary. So, if you were making 30 you are now making 15 40/20 etc. At the same time that is happening, you have to build a new life. New apartment, new plates, new bed, new dishes, etc.

The payer, most often the man, will pay all taxes on that amount. The payment is tax free to the woman.

The man is required to provide health insurance for the child outside of the child support payment.

The man is required to cover %50 of what are called ancillary expenses. This could include dental, Girl Scouts, special education, etc. If you fall behind on your payments your driver's license will be suspended and you could face jail time.

Now comes the good part. When she gets pregnant you are making $40,000 a year. So, the child support amount is set at that level.

Let's say you want to take a job for 30,000 because it provides a better career path. This is called a ‘voluntary reduction in pay’. Because it is called voluntary, you are still on the hook for the original 40,000 amount even though you are now making 30,000. So, practically speaking, you are required by law to make as much or more than you make at the time of the judgment, for the rest of the 20 years. Or you wind up going into arrears, lose your license, and possibly go to jail.

Any time the man receives a raise, he must report this to the government.
Any time the man receives a bonus or windfall, he is required to report this to the government.
Any time the man changes jobs, he is required to report this to the government.
Any time the man moves, he is required to report this to the government.

The woman, on the other hand, has no obligations or responsibilities of any kind. She does not have to report how much she makes. She does not have to report how she is spending the money. She is totally free and clear except now she has a pension.

As far as the child, the woman will have discretion on if you see the child, for how long, and in what circumstances. Regardless of all the agreements and good intentions at the outset, the child will inevitably be exposed to a lot of hostility and negativity toward the father. The mother will do as she pleases without fear of consequence including moving out of town and out of state. And eventually a new boyfriend will take the natural father's place entirely.

So, over time over years, you are sending a massive part of your paycheck to some woman you used to know years ago, and a child who now calls some other guy Dad.

I know this is a little long, but it could be longer. I made it as short as I could. Child support is not about 'supporting the child'. It is a legal judgment against the man(normally) enforced by the Sheriffs Department. It is wholly punitive, in my opinion. Child support is a life killer especially if you have a vindictive partner with a good lawyer.

26 posted on 05/27/2010 12:15:06 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: imskylark

You are correct. And if the BC fails, then the man is responsible for making a baby as much as the woman is.


27 posted on 05/27/2010 1:11:57 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: 240B

Child support, except for wealthy fathers, does not amount to enough to support a woman with one or more children. I received $300/month for 2 boys. After the oldest turned 18 and graduated from high school, it dropped to $250/month, although I still supported the oldest (he joined the USAF the following August). As soon as the youngest turned 18 (after graduation), the support stopped, although I continued to support him for the next 5 years while he went to college. Child support does not usually contribute greatly to the family finances and it does not come near to half the cost of raising a child, although anything is a help.


28 posted on 05/27/2010 1:18:11 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 240B
the woman can watch Oprah and eat chocolates on the couch while collecting a check every month

That is sophistry. Few women collect enough money for child support watch oprah and eat chocolates blah, blah, blah.

29 posted on 05/27/2010 1:21:07 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 240B
The courts can legally take(garnish) up to %50 percent of your salary. So, if you were making 30 you are now making 15 40/20 etc.

Not in Texas. If a woman is lucky, her children may get 20%. I wasn't lucky. What's with you guys who think a man doesn't need to/or shouldn't have to support his own flesh and blood?

30 posted on 05/27/2010 1:25:26 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb

That makes no sense to me. He must be a very very junior soldier for that amount.

The military has their own child support rates for each rank. That amount would apply to a private or a corporal. If he is higher than that, you should be getting more.

You can call the CSEA and ask for a ‘change of circumstance review’. You will submit your income, he will submit his and they will determine the correct amount.

My story has to do with a wife getting pregnant immediately after the wedding, and then seeking divorce immediately after the birth.

If the wife initiated the divorce specifically for the child support, she should bear the responsibility. IMO

However, in cases of the Husband walking out, or drugs, or violence, or infidelity, then that is a whole different situation and I would support the wife in those cases.


31 posted on 05/27/2010 1:27:23 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: 240B
Any time the man receives a raise, he must report this to the government.

Any time the man receives a bonus or windfall, he is required to report this to the government.

Any time the man changes jobs, he is required to report this to the government.

Any time the man moves, he is required to report this to the government.

Not in Texas.

Not in Texas.

Not in Texas.

Not in Texas.

The woman must do all the leg work and bring the man back to court she thinks her children are entitled to higher benefits if any of the above happens. It's up to her to track him down if he moves or changes jobs and a new order is required to deduct the child support from his wages. In Texas, if the man paid to support his children as directed by the court, then garnishment would not be necessary.

32 posted on 05/27/2010 1:29:37 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: 240B

Go back and re-read—my SON joined the USAF in August after he turned 18. I did not have to support him, although I helped him a lot during his years at the USAFA. Nothing from his father.


33 posted on 05/27/2010 1:33:07 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DallasDeb

In my state the garnishment is automatic.
Also again, you should contact the CSEA to review your case.

Either Texas has a much, much, more lax system than the one I am in, or you are not as diligent as my ex and are not exercising all your rights.

Sounds like something is wrong to me.


34 posted on 05/27/2010 1:41:23 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: 240B

It’s all behind me now. Their father couldn’t hold down a job and God blessed me with a successful career. But those early years were tough.


35 posted on 05/27/2010 1:47:14 PM PDT by DallasDeb (USAFA '06 Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: 240B

>>OH my goodness. You really are out of the loop.<<

OH my goodness. You never answered the question.
Didn’t you plan to support any child you made?


36 posted on 05/27/2010 1:49:26 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am inyenzi on the Religion Forum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: markomalley
How about keeping the pants zipped?

Is that related to pregnancy? Maybe after a few more babies/abortions, the mom will figure that out too.

37 posted on 05/27/2010 2:03:29 PM PDT by Pollster1 (Natural born citizen of the USA, with the birth certificate to prove it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

“For Catholics, the answer is easy: A man who doesn’t want to be a parent should not be having sex.”

Most Christians I know believe that.


38 posted on 05/27/2010 2:04:08 PM PDT by Grunthor (Faster than the speed of smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
I don’t know. I never had a chance to think about it.
Right after the divorce my salary was garnished for an amount ordered by the court, and I felt like I was put on a kind of ‘probation’ where I had to report everything that happens to me and everything I do to the CSEA.

I never had a chance to think about ‘what I plan’. It was all taken out of my hands and controlled by the state.

What I plan or what I want is irrelevent at this point. It just doesn't matter.

39 posted on 05/27/2010 2:08:06 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SmokingJoe

“On the other hand, no man can be given the power to dictate what happens to someone else’s body”

Wow, careful, that sounds like the argument the pro-aborts use.


40 posted on 05/27/2010 2:13:00 PM PDT by Grunthor (Faster than the speed of smell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: 240B

>>I never had a chance to think about ‘what I plan’. It was all taken out of my hands and controlled by the state.<<

We all have choices to make.
Did you choose a woman in which to plant your seed?

Sure did.

Did you know that by doing that she could get pregnant and then you would be expected to support that child?

Hope so.

I’m sorry you picked badly, but you will be supporting that child for 20 years whether you live with the mother or not.

And it’s just 20 years, not forever.

Here is something to make you feel better though. I have two sisters. Both of them were manipulative b!tches with ex-husbands. The guys paid their cash and basically did their time. Right now, out of five kids, one speaks with her mother. All of them love their dads.

What goes around comes around, my FRiend. She may win now, but you will win later.


41 posted on 05/27/2010 2:23:37 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am inyenzi on the Religion Forum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom

Thank you very much. That is encouraging.
I am over 40 now so 20 years equates to the rest of my functional life.

But, we shall see. thanks again


42 posted on 05/27/2010 2:37:26 PM PDT by 240B (he is doing everything he said he wouldn't and not doing what he said he would)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: 240B

>>I am over 40 now so 20 years equates to the rest of my functional life.<<

Not really. You can’t even go on SS until 70.

Seriously, I ran a Psych office in Ohio. My boss got RAPED by his ex. Had to pay 4000.00 a month in child support when (I did his books) he made 3700.00 a month. He was despondent when he got the ruling.

I looked at him and said, “It’s not forever.” and it wasn’t.
I also said, “Your children will love you FOR ever.” They do. Sometimes we are dealt really bad cards, but would you really give up your child for some cash? If you had the choice, would you walk away from your kid? No, I know you wouldn’t.

Someday, she’ll get hers. You may not see it, you may not be there, but understand, Karma is a bite to someone who thinks she is right, when she is just a b!tch.


43 posted on 05/27/2010 2:47:41 PM PDT by netmilsmom (I am inyenzi on the Religion Forum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Grunthor
Wow, careful, that sounds like the argument the pro-aborts use.

Big difference.
I am arguing against a guy trying to force a woman to have an abortion just because he happened to have sex with her one night without using protection.
Going by that thinking the woman should have the power to get him castrated for not using enough protection and knocking her up.
No one should be able to order any operation carried out on someonone else’s body, unless the person is incapacitated or has lost use of their mental faculties.

44 posted on 05/27/2010 3:03:16 PM PDT by SmokingJoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 240B
You're supposed to say bon-bons.

No one seems to be addressing the problem that if a man can legally oblige a woman to have his child, he is also off the hook if he says he doesn't want it. You can't have it both ways.

Ardent pro-lifers take note: If you think more babies would be saved if men had this right, you are very much mistaken. More women would have abortions, and if they didn't, both mother and child would suffer.

It takes two. What is so hard to understand about that?

45 posted on 05/27/2010 3:14:50 PM PDT by firebrand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 240B

If the issue is marraige, than why is abstinence only ok if you are 15?

You don’t want to have kids, don’t get married. If you don’t trust the wife, don’t get married to her. How hard is this? If you do get married, and she pulls this stunt, man up and move on.

You chose her, nobody forced you to get married to her.

If men were men and manned up you’d not see this.


46 posted on 05/27/2010 4:15:27 PM PDT by BenKenobi (I want to hear more about Sam! Samwise the stouthearted!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: markomalley

don’t you mean the Bible?


47 posted on 05/28/2010 11:38:44 AM PDT by jackspyder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson