President Bush is now fighting the war I worked hard to send him there to fight 6 years ago. The selection of Samuel Alito as the replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor was the choice that should have been made right out of the gate. Even though I disagreed with his previous selection, I now stand firmly behind him in what will turn out to be the war war worth fighting. Democrats and liberals are intent on describing the nation as one which supports a living constitution. One which gradually includes the degregated opinions of society. NO. The constitution is the law of the land. In no way does it describe homosexual marriage, abortion, the outright larceny of property. These are all societally driven agenda's towards the abolishment of our moral country.
Now it begins.
Oct 31, 2005
Fight for the Soul of the Nation
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
34 comments:
OH FOR PETE SAKE'S WHAT'S WITH THE NIT-PICKING ABOUT GRAMMAR AND SPELLING?? IF YOU CAN'T MAKE A CONSTRUCTIVE COMMENT ON THE ISSUES BEING POSTED, THEN JUST DON'T BOTHER!
Not anger "anon2" but frustration at the pettiness of others who feel the need to provoke an argument. But enough said about that--Let's get this discussion back on track.
GW should have nominated Alito right from the start, this would have avoided the whole Harriet Miers debacle and would have rendered the debate over qualifications a moot point. Quite frankly I'm just not sure if this nomination can repair the damage done to GW's creditability--he may be looked at with suspicion in the future regardless of who is being nominated for what position.
BTW: This hasn't been a "red-letter" day and it is just this kind of nonsense that really pi##es me off!
You won't get any discussion from Aononymous2 - he's only interested in condescending bullsh_t
From now on I will misspell every other word so that Anonymous will come back. I have missed him so.
WAIT... I'll post Anonymous's next comment for him
"HOW WILL WE KNOW THE DIFFERENCE"
ha ha ha ha ha ha... so substitive on the issues is he.
VERY FUNNY--PA! (LOL)
Excuse me for asking--but WHAT DO YOU KNOW ANYWAY? All we get from you is nit-picking nonsense. If you'd ever get around to making a legitimate comment and cut out all the unnecessary BS I probably wouldn't know how to react. I had almost forgot that you were out there--I really have to be careful about the things I ask for.
Your hilarious anon.
1. Give me the name of your school and I'll contact them to verify your story.
2. A marriage in the history of mankind has been defined as a union between a man and a woman. Your right, nothing in the constitution specifically outlines this. The reason, because moral, intelligent people such as our founding fathers never envisioned that society would be corrupted enough to even consider the thought.
3. I agree, morality shouldn't have to be legislated on. Unfortunately degenerates in our society want to make their way of life a norm so the only way to keep that from happening is to do so. And yes, I do think homosexuals are degenerates and the constitution does exactly give me the right to think so.
Oh I'm sorry but it does. The constitution absolutely does give me the right to decide what will be legal in our country. Its called a legislative branch and I get a vote. So I will continue to insist that my legislators block any attempts by the degenerates of our society to mainstream their lifestyles on the rest of America.
And... Make no mistake, I DONT care that these degenerates live the way they do, but I DO and will continue to fight against it being accepted as normal in our country.
There's just no rebuttel to that kind of logic gentlemen, you win, congratulations.
WHAT A BUNCH OF DRIVVEL, WELL EVERYTHING EXCEPT THE PART ABOUT THE BIBLE ALWAYS BEING RIGHT-BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT IT IS!!
It's not me that pathetic!!
FINALLY! -
Ok - curious, While it is hard to remove oneself from the teachings of their creator I will attempt to answer your question. Homosexuality at its base is an abomination of historical mankind. There is no evidence in the animal world or any other sources or semblances of a society of such a veering of sexual or reproductive fundamentals. A sexual being is such for the purpose of reproducing and populating a race or people. Homosexuals are a product of the “feel good do it” society that has been nurtured by our modern moral downfall. The modern family has been chipped away at by these liberal ideals that love is love regardless of who it is with. The corruption of the family has direct repercussions throughout society. It is another in a progression of steps in which moral decline has infected America. Lying and divorce is commonplace, thievery is everywhere, and trust is non-existent. Children in the end are the ones most affected by this. Their concrete understanding of love, family and relationships are bastardized into whatever works mentality. It is a continuing attempt of a minority of disturbed individuals to impose their corrupt lifestyle on America.
There you are...If it doesn't hurt anyone else it must be right... the LIBERAL Mantra perfectly articulated.
To curious2day: It is not the person who is trapped in the bondage of homosexuality that is offensive, but it is their arrogance in demanding special protections and considerations because of their "orientation," and their blatant attacks that anyone who disagrees with their point of view is intolerant and a bigot. While some choose to ignore the Biblical condemnations of homosexuality they are clear and unambiguous, not to mention that they are simply impossible to dismiss. Respecting your curiosity, and maybe trying to anticipate a question that you may raise, I suspect that you are wondering how all this will be affected by the Justices of the Supreme Court? That's simple, gay activists will be challenging traditional moral values through the courts, since they are more sympathetic that the State Legislatures. However the signals from the judiciary have been mixed and convuluted making it hard to keep our country on the path that was established by our Founding Father over two centuries ago.
The marriage relationship is a sacred bond, established by God, not by civilian government, therefore any attempt to change what God had ordained is an abomination, pure and simple.
Children are our greatest blessing. They absorb what they see and hear like a sponge. Imagine how confusing it must be for an impressionable child when they hear they have two mommies or two daddies. This is not only an affront God's holy teachings that the marriage relationship is the union of one man and one woman, it goes against the natural order of our society and culture.
No doubt I have raised more questions than I have tried to answer in this brief comment, but I hope and pray that it was of some assistance as you formulate your own position on this matter.
"Morality has no basis in fact?" WHAT WORLD DO YOU LIVE IN ANYWAY??
Right, wrong and morality are completely relative? Good grief, what a shocker that is? In case you haven't noticed, we do not live in a philosophical world.
It is a world of unspeakable evil and hatred toward one another, but I guess that doesn't fit into your relative/subjective bubble? In the world in which I and others live there is a clear distinction of what is right and what is wrong it was laid down over 2000 years ago when God gave Moses the Ten Commandments. Whether you accept it or not, those two stone tablets laid the foundation for the civil and moral laws that we have today and should be a strong guiding factor in our daily lives.
Do I say that there is an all encompassing definitive and proven "list of every possible act?" Absolutely! Read the Bible lately? Like it or not it covers every aspect of human behavior.
I'll say one thing, I'm sure glad I don't live in your morally relative and subjective world, where everyone does his or her own thing with no consequences. But even the most arrogant will one day realize just how wrong they have been. I just hope and pray that I'm not around with the Lord pours out his judgment on this world. I don't think you'd want to be here either, but I'm only guessing of course. Good Luck!
O Contrar mon amie
Having tax dollars paid out to healthcare and welfare when these sicko's can't work anymore because they are dying of aids - and because they are now "Married" they get society's backing - no I dont' want to think about it but more and more we are forced to! - Its wrong, - they can go back in the closet for all I care.
Thank God your morality isn't most peoples.
Good Grief--Do you hear yourself?? I shudder to think of the State of the America if everyone had your pathetic views. And just for the record, I never suggested that ours or any governmental entity should take orders from the Vatican. I'm not sure where you get your notions.
Your relative morality is what will ultimately be the downfall of America. And it's not me who will be casting the hellfire. Because you choose to ignore the teachings and warnings of Scripture does not change their truth. And yes the Bible was physically written by men--men inspired by the Holy Spirit of God.
All the things you cite i.e., murder, rape genocide are covered in that Bible which you conveniently choose to ignore. But I must disagree that war is wrong--there are instances where to protect our most basic and fundamental liberties we MUST FIGHT!
As shallow and short-sighted your views are you are certainly entitled to them, but I certainly do not share them, because those things such as sodomy and other morally unacceptable acts scare the very heart of our society, so I beg to differ that they do not hurt me. Certainly they do not hurt me physically but they cause me great distress when I see what this type of behavior is doing to our country and our culture.
Are you listening to yourself?? I have not "judged" a single person who trapped in the bondage of homosexuality, however I find their lifestyle morally repugnant--and I'm not the one who said it. Remember that Bible you so casually dismiss, it's in there. And I'm just wondering what percentage of the 524,060 people who died of HIV and AIDS were homosexual? If I were a betting man, I'd wager the percentage is rather high.
As for the remainder of your "comment" here's a question: Does anyone have a gun put to their heads and are they forced to go to McDonalds, Burger King or KFC (one of my favoriates BTW)?? If you're concerned about high medical bills due to obesity, then why not exercise a little discipline and avoid fast-food places.
Not a problem. I've been that me and PA think alot alike!
Sorry--left out the word "told".
Hey anon - I think thou "doest" protest too much...
You know PA--I really hate Shakespeare-LOL
I don't think nit-picker is the word. But anyway, let's try to keep on point and let this "sniping" out of the discussion process. I don't want to come across as being rude, but if you can't contribute in a constructive manner then just don't bother. You really make youself look bad, and your arguments just do not hold water.
Thanks for the correction anon but the "quotes" actually were supposed to indicate the inaccuracy of the statement. Its' a personal play on the phrase. Regardless. I think you protest so much about this because you have stake in the outcome.
Is there another "anonymous2" out there??
It wasn't off-topic at all and since the attempted suttle reference went completely over your head I'll just say it.
I think your are unreasonably argumentative about this because you are gay. You aren't arguing sensibly because you have a dog in this fight.
Yeah that was done on purpose too just to make you feel good.
You know "anon2" I find it truly amazing how quick you are to assume what PA and I will and will not judge. It really shows how much you don't understand about Christians let alone Conservatives. And just so you know Christian and Conservative is not synonymous. That Bible you so easily dismiss teaches clearly that immoral behavior must be judged--not the person-but the BEHAVIOR! There is a significant difference.
Oh I was just waiting for someone to use Matthew 7:1, because you stop where everyone else does and uses that as some sort of indictment against making judgments about sinful behavior.
So "anon2" Here's the proper use of the verse: "Judge not that ye be not judged. For as you judge so you shall be judged, and with what measure you judge the same shall be meeted back to you." The admonition here is against "harsh" judgment, and that we should not judge the individual. If you're going to try to throw Scripture at me, I suggest that you do so properly!
AMEN DB!
My-My such knowledge of Scripture-I should be impressed. What I find amazing is how you can twist Matthew 7:1 until it fits your interpretation, but then I forget that the Bible was written by men and not by God. But taking this a bit further, 1 Corinthians 5:9 tells us that immorality must be judged. Whether you accept it or not that's just the way it is.
A second point, everything does not have to be spelled out is precise detail. I suspect you know, or maybe you do not that Jesus often taught by means of parables or stories, but His message was clear and easy to understand, and although the specific words are not used to your satisfaction, the meaning is clear.
Finally--The Final Judgement is God's and no one else's, and I'm not trying to save anyone-but God can, but only if you accept this amazing gift--If you choose to follow the ways of the world--well I can only feel sorry for you!
I must have given you too much credit for knowing your Scripture, because you don't know half as much as I thought you did, and since you want to act like an arrogant smartass, that's exactly how I am going to respond. First of all I did not add anything to the verse, that was the interpretation of it and it was quite proper if you understand that it is God's Word and not man.
Second, I never said that I didn't think you were a Christian, but I'm just wondering if you go to BK every week does that make you a cheesburger? So if you are claiming that just because you go to Church every Sunday you are a Christian-TRY AGAIN!!
I'm not sure where you get your inane notions, but I've had enough of your ludicrous and arrogant arguments.
I make NO assumptions about your salvation or lack thereof. That's between you and God. Anyway enough said on this discussion.
Post a Comment