Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Royal Wedding: Archbishop Backs William and Kate's Decision to Live Together Before Marriage
The Daily Telegraph (UK) ^ | 4/29/11 | Tim Ross, Jonathan Wynne-Jones and Gordon Rayner

Posted on 04/30/2011 2:38:35 PM PDT by marshmallow

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 301-346 next last
To: Gabz

Comment #151 Removed by Moderator

151 posted on 04/30/2011 10:33:31 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Shemp was the Fourth Stooge of the Apocalypse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Your right, but then again an 18 year old has about as much business marrying as I do commanding the space shuttle.

I disagree with the stereotype that 18 years old is too young to marry. I met my wife while we were both in High School (me 17, she 16). Within a year of dating I KNEW that I was going to marry her. Three years after meeting, she 19 and me 20, we married. We have been married for 25 years, we have three children and I have never had sex with anyone else, and I wouldn't want to do it over any differently.

The most confused single men I knew, were the ones who tried to live the philosophy of sleeping around awhile before settling down. If any of my children told me they wanted to get married at 18, I certainly wouldn't be against it because of the age. In fact, I think the sooner, the better.
152 posted on 04/30/2011 10:41:46 PM PDT by ScubieNuc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
But it’s hardly a surprise from this gay-loving, Muslim-loving jerk who was chosen for his job by Tony Blair, who wanted someone who would normalize gay bishops.

You are getting your Anglican Archbishops confused.

The Primate of All England and the Primate of England are not the same person. And yes, they have been seen together.

They are easy to tell apart. Canterbury wears a black cassock and has a beard. York wears a red cassock and doesn't.

(And the main thing he has said about gay bishops is that youse Americans should stop appointing them)

153 posted on 04/30/2011 10:47:20 PM PDT by Oztrich Boy (Monarchy is the one system of government where power is exercised for the good of all - Aristotle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Oztrich Boy

So Canterbury is the one on the right? Wow, they could be twins!


154 posted on 04/30/2011 10:55:28 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Shemp was the Fourth Stooge of the Apocalypse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

shotgun, shovel, and a large backyard. LOL I spit out my soda when I read that.

In this case, and only this case, I can see why they lived together first. Remember, William saw the wicked press practically chase his mom right into the the casket. From everything I’ve read of William, he’s been very protective of his Kate, worried about her safety and well-being. It’s perfectly natural for him to want her to experience that kind of scrutiny for a long period of time, to ensure that she was able to tolerate that. Evidently, he told her she was “the one” way back in 2007 or so. I can find no evidence that he was simply using Kate (i.e. the cow/milk analogy). I don’t think he was taking a “test drive” of her body parts, so much as he was her sturdiness. That is normally where the criticism of shacking up comes from; it’s for a guy to take advantage of a gal and avoid the responsibility of marriage. This sounds to me more like he wanted to make sure she’d be willing to put up with the crap that would go along with being married to him.

OTOH, had Diana lived with Mr. Global Warming for a couple of years first, she might have realized that he never did cut off things with Cruella, and saved herself years of heartbreak.

I wish these two young people the best, in any event.


155 posted on 05/01/2011 2:22:41 AM PDT by Daisyjane69 (Michael Reagan: "Welcome back, Dad, even if you're wearing a dress and bearing children this time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

The only one big concern I did have about the royal wedding that did take place was it would overshadow the making of blessed of John Paul II. But from after having viewed the vigil last night and the 30 minutes I got up to see the process of him being my blessed early this morning before going back to sleep, and with the thousands and thousands of people there, I realized this special event was not overshadowed in the least! Praise be to God!:)=^..^=


156 posted on 05/01/2011 4:09:38 AM PDT by Biggirl ("Jesus talked to us as individuals"-Jim Vicevich/Thanks JimV!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Melas

Thanks for your comments. My intent was to uphold the ideal of monogamous marriage as a lifelong commitment - with sexuality as a part of that union. Many strive for that despite earlier mistakes and failures. It is commendable that you did make the commitment to marry, and I wish you many more (hopefully happy) years together.


157 posted on 05/01/2011 7:08:52 AM PDT by tjd1454
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: manc

you wrote:

“but you feel the need to but in”

You were ill-informed and asking for information. I gave it to you. If that’s butting in, then you’ll just have to deal with it.


158 posted on 05/01/2011 7:09:59 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Aliska

Thanks for sharing your thoughts as to why so many appear to experience no guilt in engaging in behavior which traditionally has been considered improper or immoral - such as cohabitation and engaging in sexual relations before marriage.

I am reminded of the words of Jesus: “Man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the heart.” We can be very clever at disguising our true emotions, and superficially, one would get the impression that many people are not troubled by their behavior. But we don’t know what is going on inside. It’s like couples who seem to have the “perfect marriage” - until everyone is shocked to learn they are divorcing. We don’t know what goes on behind closed doors - or inside people’s hearts.

Actually, the ability to feel guilt is a normal response. The Bible speaks of those who have their “conscience seared” and who apparently have lost the ability to feel remorse for their sin. The souls of such are in mortal danger. If we feel regret for what we have done, there remains hope that we will respond to God’s forgiveness.

And this is the wonderful thing: there is always hope as long as we are willing to reach out to God, and He always has a “revised” Plan ready for those of us who have made a mess of Plan A, or Plan B - some of us are working on Plan X...

All the best.


159 posted on 05/01/2011 7:33:21 AM PDT by tjd1454
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

LOL Deal with what, you , please my sides are spltting


160 posted on 05/01/2011 8:15:41 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 158 | View Replies]

Comment #161 Removed by Moderator

Comment #162 Removed by Moderator

To: The Magical Mischief Tour
Well the one thing I can attest to personally is the fact that women nowadays seem to develop what I can only describe as an extreme cavalier attitude shortly after marriage. And then shortly after that, begin to take more than they give regarding all aspects of a marriage.

Oh, for cryin' out freakin' loud. What a classic misogynistic statement.

:eyeroll:

163 posted on 05/01/2011 8:27:29 AM PDT by Allegra (Hey! Stop looking at my tagline like that.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998; manc
Your post will have to be pulled also for having quoted the potty language.

Both of you, do not make this thread "about" each other - that is a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

164 posted on 05/01/2011 8:28:00 AM PDT by Religion Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 162 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
Statistics can say lots of things. They are just numbers and can be shown to say anything the party spouting them chooses them to say.

Best comment on this thread. There are many reasons a couple lives together and many reasons for a divorce. To draw a conclusion based on one variable, cohabitation or not, is self serving. So is passing judgment on any couple that chooses cohabitation prior to marriage. While passing judgment is human nature, it really is God's job.

165 posted on 05/01/2011 8:32:04 AM PDT by LuvFreeRepublic (Support our military or leave. I will help you pack BO!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 119 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler

There are ways of discerning the character of an individual that don’t involve the exchange of body fluids.

What kind of parent wants a man to “try out” his daughter’s vagina before committing to love and cherish her?
***************************************************

Do you think that couples won’t have sex, if they don’t live together?


166 posted on 05/01/2011 8:34:18 AM PDT by kara37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: LuvFreeRepublic

exactly, there are many reasons for living with each other and many reasons for a divorce.

For some to pass judgment on others because of their strict views is not right IMHO .

We , my wife and I lived with each other, we’re happy we did and we’re going on 16 years with 3 great kids.

I do have to wonder if those who are preaching their views and passing judgment on a couple they have no clue about have kids and did their kids never have sex and never live with someone before marriage.

I stick with my views that I have no problem if my kids live with someone before marriage and I’d rather know who they’re marrying.
Like the saying goes, you do not know a person until you live with them and no way do I want my kids to marry someone only to find they have the most disgusting lifestyle, disgusting habits and is a slob who likes to eat in bed and never pick their clothes up.

If someone doesn’t want to live with their future spouse so be it , that is up to them both and not for us to run around passing judgment.

Is there some place in the Bible where it states you should not live with each other before marriage and if so could someone give me the verse please.


167 posted on 05/01/2011 9:15:13 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 165 | View Replies]

To: manc

See what I mean? Are you learning yet?


168 posted on 05/01/2011 9:20:49 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 160 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“Is there some place in the Bible where it states you should not live with each other before marriage and if so could someone give me the verse please.”

Are you kidding? Do you expect everything to be explicit in scripture? Do you have a verse for THAT?

John 4:18 “The fact is, you have had five husbands, and the man you now have is not your husband. What you have just said is quite true.”

There’s a woman living with a man who is not her husband. Do you think Jesus approves of disapproves?


169 posted on 05/01/2011 9:29:53 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 167 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

why not go and ask him but one thing is clear it doe snot say you should not live with each other and so why if people do.

It’s not my family and do you have kids?


170 posted on 05/01/2011 9:48:02 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

oh yes I am that if I say thing to you I get reported.

Best not say anything else as I don’t want to get someone knickers in a twist.


171 posted on 05/01/2011 9:50:42 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Do you think people should live with each other before marriage and do you have kids?


172 posted on 05/01/2011 9:52:15 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“why not go and ask him but one thing is clear it doe snot say you should not live with each other and so why if people do.”

Did Jesus approve of her actions? It seems obvious that the answer is no. Perhaps that’s why you are avoiding it.

“It’s not my family and do you have kids?”

So you think that Jesus has a sliding code of morality? No, He does not. Perhaps that’s why you’re trying to change the subject yet again.


173 posted on 05/01/2011 9:54:33 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“oh yes I am that if I say thing to you I get reported.”

Nope. “Potty language” is the problem. You used it and your post got pulled - so did mine for just quoting you. That’s how things work.

“Best not say anything else as I don’t want to get someone knickers in a twist.”

Just don’t use the language you shouldn’t use.


174 posted on 05/01/2011 9:56:42 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

asking you a question and wondered seeing as you’re Catholic if they live by your rules but it seems you cannot answer that, must have been a tough question.

Do you have kids?

As for Jesus and you thinking you know him and what he would think then does he say love unto others.

BTW You’re Catholic this couple are not and you don’t even know them so do you run around preaching your, O best not say it before you report me ARF


175 posted on 05/01/2011 9:58:35 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“Do you think people should live with each other before marriage and do you have kids?”

What do you think Jesus thinks of fornication, putting yourself in the occasion of sin and cohabitation? Please use ONLY Bible verse to prove your answer.


176 posted on 05/01/2011 9:58:35 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

er I don’t know because I don’t know him and if you find m e where he says do not live with each other before marriage then I’ll stick with that answer.

What would he think, ARF like you know


177 posted on 05/01/2011 10:00:11 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

ever thought people do not live by your faith?
Ever thought what it is like to have kids?
Ever thought what it is like to be a parent?
Ever though people couldn’t careless about your faith or how you think people should live?
No don’t answer by saying what would Jesus think either


178 posted on 05/01/2011 10:02:03 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

I’ve used the word since I came onto this site,even to JR but I don’;t come onto the religion threads much as a few people like to push their faith and think their faith is the supreme one. They like to quote verses which does not even apply to their lives.


179 posted on 05/01/2011 10:04:03 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 174 | View Replies]



Free Republic is your shelter from the storm
Help keep the lights on


When you sign-up to be a New Monthly Donor

FReeper leapfrog0202 and Anonymous Donor are donating $10 for each New Monthly Donor!!!

FReeper JustaDumbBlonde is donating $5 for each New Monthly Donor to sign-up before midnight tonight!!!!


Lazamataz needs us, and we need Lazamataz!

180 posted on 05/01/2011 10:04:46 AM PDT by TheOldLady
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“asking you a question and wondered seeing as you’re Catholic if they live by your rules but it seems you cannot answer that, must have been a tough question.”

No, it is an easy one. It just isn’t relevant. Truth is not contingent upon people following it. Either something is true or it isn’t. Whether or not people accept it as true and do the right thing with it is a different story. Christ is the Savior. That’s true. Does that mean everyone accepts it as true? No. Is it any less true when they don’t? No.

“Do you have kids?”

Irrelevant. Whether or not I have children in no way impacts the truth. Either something is true or it is not. Having children or not having children in no way impacts what is true.

“As for Jesus and you thinking you know him and what he would think then does he say love unto others.”

Yes, Jesus says to love. What He didn’t say was to fornicate. You are collapsing love and pre-marital sex as if they are the same. That’s not the best argument to say the least.

“BTW You’re Catholic this couple are not and you don’t even know them so do you run around preaching your, O best not say it before you report me ARF”

It doesn’t matter that they are not Catholic. The truth is still the truth. It doesn’t change just because these two belong to a johnny-come-lately sect. Do the Ten Commandments not apply to non-Jews and non-Catholics? Do the Eight Beatitudes apply only to Catholics? And I don’t have to know the couple personally to know that they are not very religious - their words and actions show that - and they - as made clear by the prelate in the opening article tacitly admits - have been having sexual relations. Everyone knows it. That’s the whole point of the article in the first place. If Kate Middleton had been at the well just a week ago with Jesus what would He have told her?


181 posted on 05/01/2011 10:10:01 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 175 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“er I don’t know because I don’t know him”

That is abundantly clear. Perhaps if Christ played a bigger role in your life, you would think differently.

“and if you find m e where he says do not live with each other before marriage then I’ll stick with that answer.”

I posted a verse. You are ignoring it.

“What would he think, ARF like you know”

You don’t? Earlier you claimed He wants us to love. How do you know? Because He said so. Now you are essentially claiming He approves of sin or the occasions of sin. He did not such thing. He made it abundantly clear we are to avoid sin.


182 posted on 05/01/2011 10:13:48 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 177 | View Replies]

To: kara37
Do you think that couples won’t have sex, if they don’t live together?

Do you think a parent show advise his daughter to do so?

183 posted on 05/01/2011 10:15:10 AM PDT by Jeff Chandler (Shemp was the Fourth Stooge of the Apocalypse.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 166 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“ever thought people do not live by your faith?”

Yes, and that doesn’t impact the truth one bit.

“Ever thought what it is like to have kids?”

Irrelevant. Having children in no way changes the truth. Not having children in no way changes the truth. If someone has ten kids and another person has only two, does the person with ten kids get to change the truth? No. It doesn’t change.

“Ever thought what it is like to be a parent?”

Irrelevant. Being a parent doesn’t impact the truth. The truth is still true whether you have children or not. Does being a parent allow you to beat your wife? Does being a parent allow you to commit abortion? Does being NOT a parent allow you to beat your girlfriend or have an abortion? The truth stays the same.

“Ever though people couldn’t careless about your faith or how you think people should live?”

Some won’t care. Some will. The truth doesn’t change, however.

“No don’t answer by saying what would Jesus think either”

Why not? Would Jesus say that He should have given up talking becaue some wouldn’t listen?

You appear to have no argument at all.


184 posted on 05/01/2011 10:20:21 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 178 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

LOL, Yes I’ll assume you don’t have kids and you do thrust your views onto others and you know what it does matter if you ave kids because you are passing judgment onto a couple you have no clue about, you’ve never been in that situation therefore it is easier to pass judgment when you have not walked in others shoes.

Until you have then you view would be more respected.

Also your faith is what you want to live by then fine by don’t think your faith is the supreme faith where others have to go by it,. I suggest you get more upset over those in your faith who never live by their faith as there are millions, including homosexual Priests touching little boys.


185 posted on 05/01/2011 10:21:25 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 182 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“I’ve used the word since I came onto this site,”

Irrelevant. The word is frowned upon on the Religion Forum. No big deal.

“even to JR but I don’;t come onto the religion threads much as a few people like to push their faith and think their faith is the supreme one.”

And they are all wrong? You do realize that most likely some of them have to be correct on something.

“They like to quote verses which does not even apply to their lives.”

The real problem seems to be the reader and not the quoter. Often a poor grasp of scripture or not knowing Christ can get in the way of learning what is true (to say the least).


186 posted on 05/01/2011 10:23:50 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

the truth in your view not to others like me and the millions of a majority , infact billions in the world.

The truth, only in your eyes it is but you seem to not grasp that concept and think everyone has to go by your rules , that is if you actually go by your own rules , you know love others, respect others, etc etc etc.
I’m sure you know all of that but your posts do not seem to go with that part of your faith.


187 posted on 05/01/2011 10:24:02 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

They are all wrong , OMG your highness we all bow to your supremacy .

As for your last line, well have you thought people do not have your faith and think you’re wrong but like I said I suggest you have kids and raise them and then you know how people are and what problems people face.

As for Christ, you talk as if you know him and know what he meant but then again it fits your profile


188 posted on 05/01/2011 10:27:13 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Chandler
Do you think a parent show advise his daughter to do so?
***********************************************

It depends. I got married at 21 years old. We didn't live together before marriage, and that marriage lasted less than 3 years.
I lived with my second husband almost two years before we got married, because I had no desire to get married again so soon. We have now been married over 16 years.

Really, we are not talking about a 16 year old in the back seat of a car. She is 29 years old.
Do you really think that she was going to stay a virgin until 29 years old, whether she lived with him or not?

189 posted on 05/01/2011 10:43:31 AM PDT by kara37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“LOL, Yes I’ll assume you don’t have kids”

Since it is completely irrelevant either way it doesn’t really matter what you assume there now does it?

“and you do thrust your views onto others”

So, posting views is not thrusting my views on others? Aren’t you just as guilty for posting your own? Wouldn’t that be hypocrisy on your part then too? Did that even occur to you?

“and you know what it does matter if you ave kids because you are passing judgment onto a couple you have no clue about,”

Wow, what a leap in logic you make. First of all, I am not passing judgment on any couple by stating the truth. I did not condemn their souls nor does any human being have the power to do so. I, however, like anyone else can state the obvious when wrongdoing is done. If Kate Middleton had an abortion, it would be wrong. If I said so, that would simply be telling the truth and it would not be passing judgment. Now, all of that remains absolutely true whether I have five kids or none, whether I lost a child to crib death or am sterile, whther I have ten kids of my own or a blend family of six like the Brady Bunch! The truth simply doesn’t change depending upon how many children I have; and having children, or not having children, make me no more or less likely to pass judgment on someone. What your putting forward is illogical, irrational and just plain silly.

“you’ve never been in that situation therefore it is easier to pass judgment when you have not walked in others shoes.”

So, you’re now claiming that having children is walking in the shoes of Kate and William? Do you realize how utterly nonsensical that sounds?

“Until you have then you view would be more respected.”

By whom? Only illogical, emotional driven people could possibly think there is a relationship between being a parent and knowing Kate and William or at least knowing the rightness of their actions when they contradict constant Christian teaching. Seriously, how does the one connect to the other? Kate and William do not have children. By your own illogic that would mean they could never evaluate their own actions until they have kids. Do you realize how bizarre what you’re putting forward is?

“Also your faith is what you want to live by then fine by don’t think your faith is the supreme faith where others have to go by it,.”

Wait. Again you are confusing one issue with another. I have every right to tell the truth all I want. If you - or anyone else - doesn’t want to hear it, then don’t read it.

“I suggest you get more upset over those in your faith who never live by their faith as there are millions, including homosexual Priests touching little boys.”

Gee, does someone have to have children to get upset about that or can they just assume truth is truth and abusing children is wrong even if they don’t have any children themselves?

Do you see how illogical your ideas are?


190 posted on 05/01/2011 10:45:38 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“the truth in your view not to others like me and the millions of a majority , infact billions in the world.”

So, all those people who liked Obama must have been right about him? After all, there were many more of them around the world than those who disliked him. So, since according to you, it is all a numbers game, if Obama is more liked than disliked his policies must be right. Right?

No, of course not. His policies stink even if people adore him. And how well he is liked or supported has exactly NOTHING to do with truth.

“The truth, only in your eyes it is but you seem to not grasp that concept and think everyone has to go by your rules ,”

Christianity has always taught that cohabitation was wrong. Only liberal Protestant sects today teach that it is okay. It is not about my opinion. It is about truth. It hasn’t changed. You’re siding with the liberals.

“that is if you actually go by your own rules , you know love others, respect others, etc etc etc.”

Love God first and foremost.

“I’m sure you know all of that but your posts do not seem to go with that part of your faith.”

They do entirely. The problem is the reader. When a liberal doesn’t know what he is talking about he is guaranteed to mess things up. Stop siding with the liberals.


191 posted on 05/01/2011 10:51:42 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 187 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“They are all wrong , OMG your highness we all bow to your supremacy .”

The truth is the truth no matter ho wmany people believe it. When there were only 120 Christians in the upper room -and in the whole world - did that mean Christianity was untrue?

“As for your last line, well have you thought people do not have your faith and think you’re wrong but like I said I suggest you have kids and raise them and then you know how people are and what problems people face.”

The truth doesn’t change no matter how many children a man has, doesn’t have, lost to death in the crib or womb. The truth is always the truth.

“As for Christ, you talk as if you know him and know what he meant but then again it fits your profile”

And you speak as if you don’t know Him and don’t know what he meant but then again that fits your profile.


192 posted on 05/01/2011 11:02:36 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 188 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
read what you write and ask yourself if I had kids would I still be like this, ask yourself about how you live and how you tell people they are all wrong but you are right and then say yourself this. Maybe I might not know everything i thought I did and I cannot maybe tell people what is right when I do not know them and they do not have my faith and I sure as heck ARF have more of a problem with others who are homosexuals touching little boys than this.
193 posted on 05/01/2011 11:05:26 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

there you go again, I’m now siding with liberals, you don’t even know me or what I think on most issues, get your head out where it can see sunshine


194 posted on 05/01/2011 11:06:23 AM PDT by manc (Shame on all who voted for the repeal of DADT, who supported it or never tried to stop it. Traitors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 191 | View Replies]

To: marshmallow

What do you want from a church born out of adultery?


195 posted on 05/01/2011 11:08:41 AM PDT by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kara37

You wrote:

“Do you really think that she was going to stay a virgin until 29 years old, whether she lived with him or not?”

Yes, if she believed it was important and moral. I have a 31 year old friend getting married in October. She’s a virgin. She’s also gorgeous and was always pursued by men. A 32 year old friend got married in December 2009. She was a virgin. She’s attractive and very athletic. She never lacked for male attention and was engaged once before. Both of them are devout Catholics. Both, not incidentally, studied and teach Theology of the Body. That’s not a coincidence.


196 posted on 05/01/2011 11:12:24 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“read what you write and ask yourself if I had kids would I still be like this,”

The truth doesn’t change. Just as losing a son to cancer won’t change the truth about the wrongness of cohabitation having more children or no children won’t change it either. If everyone you knew was wiped out tomorrow in a tornado, it still wouldn’t change what is true. If you had never been born, it still wouldn’t change the truth. The truth is not contingent upon you or your knowing it.

“ask yourself about how you live and how you tell people they are all wrong but you are right and then say yourself this.”

It has nothing to do with it. Either something is right and true or it isn’t. It doesn’t matter who or how many believe it.

“Maybe I might not know everything i thought I did and I cannot maybe tell people what is right when I do not know them and they do not have my faith and I sure as heck ARF have more of a problem with others who are homosexuals touching little boys than this.”

And you should. But whether you do or not doesn’t change the fact that cohabitation is wrong. The fact that there are things worse than cohabitation doesn’t mean that cohabitation is right. Murder is worse than arson. That doesn’t mean arson isn’t wrong.


197 posted on 05/01/2011 11:21:44 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies]

To: manc

You wrote:

“there you go again, I’m now siding with liberals, you don’t even know me or what I think on most issues, get your head out where it can see sunshine”

What is seen are your words. You are a relativist. You have said - repeatedly - that things are a matter of point of view, walking is someone else’s shoes, etc. That’s relativism. Liberals are always relativists. Conservatives never are. They can’t be.


198 posted on 05/01/2011 11:24:56 AM PDT by vladimir998 (Copts, Nazis, Franks and Beans - what a public school education puts in your head.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: manc

Marriage is tough. That is no secret. But if you believe that you have to “try out” a person and walk away if it doesn’t suit you — what does that do for anyone? It makes no demands.

If you marry without having lived together beforehand, you WILL come up against obstances. You WILL have a few regrets ...but what it does is demand that the BEST of us rise up and become better people as a result over overcoming all that. It requires patience, forgiveness, humility ...it forges people into stronger versions of themselves.

Walking away doesn’t demand any of that. You remain mired in your own selfish little world, insisting that the next candidate meets your “requirements.” People who want perfection will be sorely disappointed in marriage. They might as well just give up trying.


199 posted on 05/01/2011 11:27:54 AM PDT by LibsRJerks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 172 | View Replies]

To: Biggirl

That’s assuming that we have a fair election and Obama would step down peacefully.


200 posted on 05/01/2011 11:30:07 AM PDT by WPaCon (Obama: pansy progressive, mad Mohammedan, or totalitarian tyrant? Or all three?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250 ... 301-346 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
Religion
Topics · Post Article

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