Mother Teresa's Letter to the US Supreme Court.

http://www.drini.com/motherteresa/own_words/us_court.html ^ | Mother Teresa

[DoWhatsRight]

Kilt- God loves you. He sent his son to show you who he is; a healer, a savior, a friend and teacher. The son died for you on a cross, so that you could be reunited with God in unbroken fellowship. Do not bow before false gods, but rather bow before him who is your maker, that you and I will stand before one day-alone, with nothing hidden, and all things revealed. That moment can be glorious for you or it can be terrifying-you decide.
DWR

[nightdriver]

"This case was overturned by the 13th Amendment, which abolished slavery altogether, and the 14th Amendment, which pronounced all persons born in the United States to be citizens of the U.S. regardless of color or previous condition of servitude."

I know that the case is rendered irrlelvant, but my question remains: Has the court vacated/overturned their decision?

I think not, and it is still a blot on their validity.

[JMJ333]

bttt

[Siobhan]

Volley BTTT!

Blessed Mother Teresa, pray for us.
Mary, Queen of All Saints, pray for us.

[victim soul]

Bumping for potential Supreme Court Justices perusal.

[chuknospam]

BUmp

[Robert Drobot]

Thank you for creating this tread to share the views of Blessed Mother Teresa, and thank you so much SkyPilot for your post # 19.

Blessed Mother Teresa, pray for us.
Mary, Queen of All Saints, pray for us.

[Robert Drobot]

Thought you might enjoy this thread (most of it anyway).

[Siobhan]

Your post Number 19 is but one excellent example that, with time, Mother will be named a Doctor of the Church.

[Siobhan]

Mother Teresa's Daily Prayer:

DEAR JESUS, help me to spread Thy fragrance everywhere I go. Flood my soul with Thy spirit and love. Penetrate and possess my whole being so utterly that all my life may only be a radiance of Thine. Shine through me and be so in me that every soul I come in contact with may feel Thy presence in my soul. Let them look up and see no longer me but only Jesus. Stay with me and then I shall begin to shine as you shine, so to shine as to be a light to others. Amen.

Listen to Mother Teresa. (A RealPlayer file)

[Aquinasfan]

Bump for Mother Theresa.

[ppaul]

BOOKMARKED.
BUMP.
BTTT.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

Is that all you think "virtual child porn" is -- a cartoon?

[HiTech RedNeck]

That's all it is; a cartoon. It may be an unspeakably filthy cartoon, but still it remains a cartoon. The day the Supreme Court comes out in favor of thought policing, is the day freedom dies in the USA.

[my_pointy_head_is_sharp]

Are you playing dumb, or what? Virtual child porn is not a cartoon! It is photographic airbrushing or graphic manipulation to make adults looks like children. I just looked it up on the web and here is a bit of what I found.

click here

"It is now possible to create sexually explicit images of "children" without actually photographing or filming a child. One could create the image from scratch, "morph" or combine an image of a child in a non-sexual situation with an adult in a sexual situation, or modify the picture of an adult so he or she looks like a child. The end result could be an image that looks exactly like the photograph of a child in a sexual situation. If that image were real, it would be a felony. But if it's virtual, it's free speech."

---

So, please stop with the "it's only a cartoon" routine.

[Ramius]

Calm down... of course child porn is disgusting.

What the SC decided, and rightly so, is that for something to be-- in fact-- child porn, it needs to therefore involve children. If it doesn't involve children... it isn't. It's not really a tough concept.

How old is someone in a cartoon, anyway?

So if a girl that is, say, 21 years of age dresses up in pigtails and a plaid skirt wants to sell pictures of herself as a catholic schoolgirl pretending to be one... but everybody involved knows it isn't really the case...

While it may be morally vacant you're saying it should be worthy of jail time?

[HiTech RedNeck]

They're cartoons in the sense that Registered's phoneyed up "photos" are cartoons.

I would allow that the usage of a picture of a child at all for one of these things is tantamount to child abuse: what if the kid later discovers that his or her likeness was twisted into one of these filthy scenes? But if an adult is likewise used with his or her consent, then there never was a child to suffer emotional injury.

Morally, it's still horrible, and no child should be allowed to view such pictures, but legally, I have a problem with jumping on the bandwagon that it's the business of government to play mind police to otherwise law abiding adults. I guess it's my libertarian streak showing.