Why Not Separate Marriage and State? ZOT! And ZOT Again!

National Review ^ | 3/29/13 | John Fund

[TheOldLady]

Yes, Colonel. Having a pesky job can really eat into ones FReeping. ;-)

It is very nice to see you, and I hope that all is well with you and yours.

[TheOldLady]

Bryan and I saw that movie a loooong time ago. The razor roller-coaster was about the ickiest thing I’d ever seen.

[TheOldLady]

Aw, you didn’t insult him. He’s happy to be mistaken for a cute little kitty.

[wagglebee]

Yes, it is interesting. It would appear that the troll was a homosexual and had been pushing their agenda all along.

[skinkinthegrass]

here's the movie...
The Vikings

http://imdb.com/rg/an_share/title/title/tt0052365/

[TheOldLady]

LOL! Thanks, I think. I’m still not interested in the razor roller-coaster, though.

But that was Tony Curtis. For some reason, I thought Cornel Wilde was Eric. I always liked Kirk Douglas. Michael Douglas, not so much.

[skinkinthegrass]

the razor roller-coaster; was "the device/method" of death in the movie.

[TheOldLady]

YES! I know. I saw the movie and vividly remember the Sultan, or Pasha or whoever he was, choosing an unfortunate mozlim
soldier who willingly sat on the blade and was cut in half lengthwise. He was demonstrating the obedience to the death of his
soldiers in his huge army. It was horripilating, but pretty dang good special effects. I hope... that they were S/Fx.

I went to college with a woman who got into S/Fx in the film industry. We were pretty close friends at the time, but we drifted
apart after college. It was still cool seeing her name in the credit roll after the movies. Her name was Lucinda, and her family
was quite upper crust and did not like her line of work.

[ansel12]

He was a libertarian, that was the agenda he was pushing, it encompasses much more than the homosexual agenda. He got away with it long enough, like he said, he was just at FR "to kill time".

To: Mozilla
The libertarians are on the wrong side of every social issue such as abortion, drug prohibition, homosexuality, marriage, prostitution and just about every other choice that consenting adults make....

So can we say that you believe that it's the proper role of DC to give sanction to or ban those activities? If so, perhaps you can show us where the constitution specifically gives the feds that power?
32 posted on 12/18/2012 3:12:17 PM by Orangedog

[Viking2002]

I always thought that Our Lord and Savior reserved The Rainbow Bridge for dogs and cats; but given His Authority, Will and Power, I don’t doubt that ol’ Fred won’t be nipping for attention at someone’s toes up there. :-)

[TheOldLady]

Oh, you betcha! I hope that Fred is keeping all our many kitties company as well. :-)

[Old Sarge]

BY THE GODS, I DOTH LOVE A MOVING TARGET...

[TADSLOS]

Target rich environment.

[Jane Long]

Well, well...the hits just keep on coming, on this thread! We see how defending traditional marriage shines a BIG light on the roaches and rats.

Good riddance, Odog.

[TheOldLady]

Dead-eye Ursula strikes at the heart again! What a woman!

[CatherineofAragon]

FYI, this morning I found out that redhawk.44 mag has been quietly escorted from the premises. ;)

[Darksheare]

JENX- Trailer The Call Of Cthulhu from JENX on Myspace.

[PieterCasparzen]

1 Peter 2

“13 Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;

14 Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

15 For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:”

[PieterCasparzen]

Many thanks for the ping to this great thread.

[PieterCasparzen]

This is a huge smoking gun post, IMHO, from 11 years ago, speaking about liberal political objectives over the last century - this post by a troll on this conservative website.

Thank you very, very much ansel12 for reposting this.

I repeat the text here for some comments:

While meaningless threats from activist social conservatives fill the air, it is unlikely that any effective action will be taken to address the root causes of this radical change. These people genuinely do not understand why hardly anyone is rallying to their "defense of marriage" cause. A large segment of society want nothing to do with fighting to save an institution that has turned their lives into a near nightmare via ruinous "family court" policies that these same groups either supported wholeheartedly or turned a deaf ear to. None of them said so much as boo about no-fault divorce laws or the blatant bias against men in the courts. Now they wonder why no one wants to take an interest in their agenda. "Save marriage...." What's left to save? These people stood by and either ignored or ridiculed all of us when their vaunted institution was used to screw over millions of us. Fighting to "save marriage" from homosexuals is like complaining about the poison ivy in their back yard when the roof and foundation of their house have caved in.

Now we see that even little minor low-level activist workers, hiding in the grassroots, are well aware of the high-level new world order strategy which used these policy change efforts over the past half century and them some:

a) ruinous "family court" policies

b) no-fault divorce laws

c) blatant bias against men in the courts

(Of course, there was also birth control and feminism as well)

to set up for the next step of their plans.

A large portion of society would then gladly surrender the legitimacy of marriage, enabling homosexual marriage.

With Biblical marriage and Biblical family disavowed by the population, the pathway to totalitarianism is cleared, but of course, the useful idiots of the homosexual agenda don't think that far ahead. They continue to help bring about their own destruction because they are enslaved to their lusts.