first Gays, now polygamy! upnext? Chickens!!!

[Dok]

first Gays, now polygamy! upnext? Chickens!!!



Sister Wives family to challenge Utah polygamy laws

The family featured on the reality TV series "Sister Wives," about an ad executive and four women he calls spouses, is going to court to challenge the government's right to criminalize its lifestyle, the family's lawyer said on Tuesday.

The family, in a lawsuit to be filed on Wednesday, will challenge Utah's bigamy statute. It is not trying to get the government to recognize plural marriage, just to stay out of the intimate affairs of consenting adults.

"We are only challenging the right of the state to prosecute people for their private relations and demanding equal treatment with other citizens in living their lives according to their own beliefs," family attorney Jonathan Turley said in a statement.

"Sister Wives", which has just concluded its second season, premiered in the U.S. on the TLC cable network in September, earning strong ratings while also drawing the attention of authorities in the Utah town of Lehi, south of Salt Lake city, where the family shared a large house.

The show documents the world of Kody Brown, then 41, and the four women he lives with -- Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn -- along with their children, as they seek to fit in with mainstream society while maintaining their religious beliefs in plural marriage.

Brown is legally married to just one of the women, but counts the three others as "sister wives," a term in polygamous sects that refers to a husband's multiple marital partners.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/12/us-polygamy-utah-idUSTRE76B6TJ20110712

[Dok]

'Sister Wives' Family Challenging Polygamy Law; No Surprise to Christians


Conservatives can say I told you so as Kody Brown of the TLC show "Sister Wives" plans to file a lawsuit Wednesday against Utah's ban on polygamy. Conservatives have been warning lawmakers that amending laws governing moral sexual behavior would open the floodgates for all kinds of consensual sexual relationships including polygamy. Now one Christian leader warns that America is falling into a downward spiral of sin.

Brown's attorney, Jonathan Turley, says he will argue that the arrangement between Brown and his four wives, Robyn, Christine, Meri and Janelle, is consensual and one made in the privacy of their own household and should therefore be legal. He is basing his assertion on a 2003 U.S. Supreme Court decision overturning sodomy laws for the benefit of gay couples.

In the case of Lawrence v. Texas, the majority ruled that the state could not prosecute people for engaging in private, consensual sexual behavior.

Justice Antonin Scalia, known to be a conservative, dissented, warning in his written opinion that the ruling could question other laws trying to rein in immoral and unacceptable sexual behaviors such as "fornication, bigamy, adultery, adult incest, bestiality and obscenity."

Richard Land, president of The Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, also warned that medding with laws such as the Defense of Marriage Act – which defines marriage as between a man and a woman – encourages others to challenge the definition of marriage.

rest: http://www.christianpost.com/news/sister-wives-family-challenging-polygamy-law-no-surprise-to-christians-52193/

[Dok]

Reality TV polygamists sue for right to lifestyle choice - gay media repudiates

gay media repudiates  that is so funny, what only the gays can have special rights? what a bunch of hypocrites

The polygamous stars of a TLC reality TV series are planning to challenge Utah’s law against bigamy, arguing that it is a violation of their right to a lifestyle choice consistent with their religious beliefs.

Pro-family activists have long warned that redefining marriage to include two men or two women would inevitably lead to legalized polygamy, with polygamists employing the “equality” and “consensual” rhetoric of the gay rights movement. However, gay rights commentators immediately distanced themselves from the polygamists’ suit, with one prominent commentator calling it “a political gift to anti-gay groups nationwide.”

Jonathan Turley, an attorney for the ‘Sister Wives’ stars, told the Associated Press in an email that he would file the lawsuit Wednesday. Turley represents Kody Brown and the four women he calls his wives: Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn.

“We are not demanding the recognition of polygamous marriage,” wrote Turley on his blog. “We are only challenging the right of the state to prosecute people for their private relations and demanding equal treatment with other citizens in living their lives according to their own beliefs.”

The lawsuit, wrote Turley, “is a challenge designed to benefit not just polygamists but all citizens who wish to live their lives according to their own values - even if those values run counter to those of the majority in the state.”

Utah attorney general spokesman Paul Murphy told the AP that the state would defend the law, noting, “So far the courts have held that states do have an interest to regulate marriage.”

In previous interviews, Kody Brown has pushed for social acceptance of his definition of marriage as a “civil rights” issue. “Part of our reason for ‘coming out’ is it’s a story that needs to be told,” Brown told the New York Daily News.

The legal development was widely noted by gay news services and blogs, many of which proactively scuttled any comparison between polygamy and same-sex “marriage.” Joe Jarvis of the Joe My God blog called the suit “a political gift to anti-gay groups nationwide,” and a Queerty article discouraged support for the Browns’ lawsuit among gay activists.

Bo Shell of the GA Voice agreed that the comparison was one of “old gay apples to polygamist oranges” - but nonetheless conceded a certain prominent point of contact.

“Rather than running for the hills in fear that I might prove anti-gay activists right, I’ll stand firm in my belief that the Browns, saying nothing of marriage equality, are beginning a fight that should draw immediate empathy from gay folks: the right to do whatever they chose in their own homes in private, consensual matters that don’t involve the government,” wrote Shell.

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/reality-tv-polygamists-sue-for-right-to-lifestyle-choice-gay-media-repudiat

[Femacamper]

Back when woman's lib was a big thing, and they were trying to past feminist legislation, Rick Wiles mentioned that one day, homosexual marriage would be legalized. He was laughed at so hard. Now it's coming true. His next predictions are legalized animal-person, adult-child, and polygamist marriages. That is seriously f***ed.

[davidlory]

Isn't marriage protected as a right under freedom of religion? This would include polygamy among consenting adults. Do I detect a tinge of jealousy? haha

[Dok]

Isn't marriage protected as a right under freedom of religion? This would include polygamy among consenting adults. Do I detect a tinge of jealousy? haha

dont know much about history do you? for starters what is a "right under freedom of religion"? never heard of that. 

Second if polygamy is a right for consenting adults, under your "right under freedom of religion" than why did the Mormons have to get rid of it in order for Utah to become a state? According to Joesph Smith you must be in a polygamist marriage in order to become a god upon death. So polygamy has never been recognized as lawful, same as gay marriage. But as with the degeneration of culture in the end times, this is expected. And if the gays can do than you cannot deny polygamy either, that also goes for chickens, small boys and girls, vacuum cleaners and plants.

so who is really jealous here? not me...

[ScipioAfricanus]

Dok it is a natural progression. Pretty soon we are going to have mixed marriages and sub marriages within marriages if all parties agree.

[Dok]

Dok it is a natural progression. Pretty soon we are going to have mixed marriages and sub marriages within marriages if all parties agree.

its the predicted out come in the end times. it is only going to get worse, and Jesus is soon about to judge this world and especially this nation. Amerika is one of the nastiest degenerate places on the planet, and soon Jesus will pass judgment. 

Rom 1:18  For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19  Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Rom 1:20  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21  Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22  Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23  And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24  Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Rom 1:25  Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Rom 1:26  For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Rom 1:28  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29  Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30  Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31  Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32  Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

[Rebelitarian]

Yep and so the door opens to all kinds of degeneracy in the name of liberalism.

 

Then pedophilia then animal-philia etc. etc. etc.

 

[ScipioAfricanus]

Amerika is one of the nastiest degenerate places on the planet, and soon Jesus will pass judgment. 

the judgment is already happening we have
1. Record Unemployment
2. Massive Debt
3. Massive deficits
4. Record divorces
5. We are in multiple wars
6. Not one ounce of possible repentance

[Dok]

the judgment is already happening we have
1. Record Unemployment
2. Massive Debt
3. Massive deficits
4. Record divorces
5. We are in multiple wars
6. Not one ounce of possible repentance

way more than that. How about all the massive natural disasters when an amerikan president talks of dividing Israel. This country is done. When the Kings of Israel sinned in Gods eye and did not follow his ways, the Lord sent sodomites into the land to live and help corrupt the people. hmmmm.... sounds familiar...

1Ki 14:24  And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel.

[davidlory]

Where does the Constitution prescribe a form of marriage? It doesn't. Congress shall make no laws respecting religion. That is freedom of religion. Therefore, if your form of marriage is part of your religion any laws made respecting its form are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

[Dok]

Where does the Constitution prescribe a form of marriage? It doesn't. Congress shall make no laws respecting religion. That is freedom of religion. Therefore, if your form of marriage is part of your religion any laws made respecting its form are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

people arent allowed to offer children to Baal anymore in furnaces, well thay can in Bohemian Grove, but the others of us just arent allowed. But dont worry, you chicken lovers will get your day before the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord..

[decepticon]

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

-John Adams

[Dok]

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.

-John Adams

i wonder why that never gets brought up more? 

[wvoutlaw2002]

HATE CRIME BILL TO NOW SHIELD PEDOPHILES

[Rebelitarian]

So this is how the republic dies...

...with grand multiple degeneracies !!!     

[Dok]

BREAKING: AP source: Obama certifies repeal of ban on gays serving openly in military. -CJ #breakingnews

More: Obama says On Sept. 20, 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' will end, once and for all - statement

http://twitter.com/#!/AP

[davidlory]

How is polygamy inherently immoral?

[decepticon]

How is polygamy inherently immoral?

That is the true question. A philosophical one, so here is my take on it.

Man and woman are made for each other. For my example I'll use a man married to lets say three women. The women are being cheated because they must divide the man into thirds. He can only give one woman his attention at any given time. One woman may get 10% of the care, another 20% and the other 70%. Needless to say some resentment may develop between the women.

The woman who gets 10%, who is a loving, caring mother, and does everything a woman must do to keep her clan of the family healthy and happy, only gets 10% of the love and care she deserves from the man. When she should be treated like the jewel she is, she's just another rock in the box.

Even the woman who gets 70% of the affection, even though she may just be the "new flame" with no kids, no contribution yet to the family, she's only there because she's hot, is being cheated. She also should get 100% of the mans available time and attention, but she only gets 70%.

The man is also cheating himself, I'll let you figure how he is doing that.

This sort of thing was acceptable in the old days when there were no men around, a women would want a child, and to prolong the species naturally, but all the men were taken. Therefore it made sense that to further the species, and give this woman something she would otherwise quite possibly never have, polygamy was not immoral.

Today our species has bountifully multiplied, mates can be found everywhere. More often than not polygamy is pursued for the man to inflate his pride and women are deceived to believe that the guy who already has two wives is their "best bet".

[Dok]

Same-sex 'marriage' gateway to legal polygamy

Some are questioning the seriousness of a move currently under way in Colorado to repeal the state's Defense of Marriage Act.

A college student has filed a request to place the proposed repeal on a future ballot, but there is no indication that it is backed by any "gay marriage" advocacy group.

Carrie Gordon Earll of Focus on the Family's CitizenLink explains that two ballot issues arose in 2006. The approval of the first amended the state constitution to define marriage in the traditional fashion.

"The other was a domestic partnership civil union-type measure. That was defeated," Earll reports. "So actually in 2006, the people [of Colorado] were very clear that they wanted marriage to be between one man and one woman -- and they didn't want counterfeit marriage to come in through another alternative."

But she cites another reason for believing Colorado residents should be wary of any further challenge to traditional marriage.

"We are seeing growing evidence that the polygamists are moving forward in their attempts to redefine marriage to being more than one spouse," the Focus spokesperson warns. "To use the same-sex 'marriage' arguments will be one of the best ways that they will be able to achieve that."

If the attorney general's office approves the ballot language to repeal the defense of marriage amendment, supporters will have to obtain roughly 86,000 signatures before taking the issue to voters.

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=1398340

[Dok]

APA fending for pedophiles?

Several well-known researchers recently made unexpected arguments on pedophilia at an academic conference in Baltimore.

Liberty Counsel Action's Matt Barber attended the conference and says he felt he was on a different planet, as the presenting professionals aimed to remove pedophilia from the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) "Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders," (DSM). That would mean that pedophilia would no longer be considered a mental disorder.

"The entire focus of the event was on the victimhood of the pedophile," Barber accounts. There was "very little concern for the children who are the victims of these individuals when they are raped, who these individuals lust after."

And he says the experts' discussions were focused on "destigmatizing pedophilia ... removing the stigma, and [getting] the public to stop demonizing pedophiles."

But the attorney reports that the APA is already moving toward declassifying pedophilia as a mental disorder "by saying that a pedophile is only a pedophile in their latest DSM ... if they are distressed by their attractions or behaviors."

So Barber decides that would bring the APA one step closer to de-classifying pedophilia as a mental disorder, as they did homosexuality in the 1970s.

Concerning that issue, the APA board has also voted unanimously to endorse homosexual "marriage," which comes as no surprise to one traditional marriage activist, since the organization has contributed to 11 amicus briefs since 2004 in court cases that favor same-sex marriage. (Listen to audio report)

"The fact that the vote was 157 to nothing shows the liberal groups think that's at work in the APA," suggests Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH). "I mean, these guys are like on another planet. In the real world, same-sex so-called marriage is very controversial, and society is divided over it. But in the APA, at least in this vote -- 157 to nothing -- everybody's for it."

But he is not convinced that all members would agree with the vote, so he is certain politics is at work within the organization.

"For them to say that opposition to same-sex marriage is causing psychological distress among lesbians and gays, I mean these guys have it completely backward," LaBarbera contends. "The reality is that self-described homosexuals and lesbians, they do have psychological problems because homosexuality is a perversion."

The AFTAH president adds that organizations like the APA "are ideologically and liberal left, and they're now at war with traditional and conservative America."

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=1413686

[Sasha]

Distill this, so now, the APA defines mental illness as being conflicted by the actions you take rather than by defining the actions themselves.

This is full on psychological relativitism, and in the end aquittal of the psychopathic tendencies running all through out the corporate world and that includes the torture sanctioning, vile APA itself.

The AMA the FDA and so and so forth are all tearing down the fabric for good humanity and health itself, and incideously toxifying our trust of medicine and doctors in general.

[Mikko]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Platypus

Ask platypus. Something that's made from a duck and a beaver. But no, seriously, it's not natural. Dogs sometimes do breed with wolves, tigers can do it with lions or cheetah etc., but you just don't cross-breed certain things. You just don't go kill people without permission. You just don't rape people. You just don't cheat them out of their livelihood. There's times we you gotta say no, and times when you need to let some people bash their head on the same wall you or someone else did, since not everyone learns from, remembers or understand history fully. I don't, I bet very few people really do.

[Freeski]

Back when woman's lib was a big thing, and they were trying to past feminist legislation, Rick Wiles mentioned that one day, homosexual marriage would be legalized. He was laughed at so hard. Now it's coming true. His next predictions are legalized animal-person, adult-child, and polygamist marriages. That is seriously f***ed.

If it "makes sense" it will be.

[Dok]

Baltimore conference: Normalize pedophilia
Exclusive: Les Kinsolving rips papers that failed to cover jaw-dropping sex confab


While I was on a brief vacation in Wyoming, Johns Hopkins University's Dr. Fred Berlin gave the keynote address at a Baltimore conference hosted by the latest pedophilia-acceptance group, called B4U-ACT.

This new organization differs from the North American Man/Boy Love Association, or NAMBLA, in that it comprises not only pedophiles, but also those who are not in that sexual orientation and want it to be publicly acceptable.

Among the 50 people who were in attendance at this outrageous event were two from Virginia's Liberty University, Matt Barber and Dr. Judith Reisman, who exposed it.

The Baltimore Sun, Washington Post and New York Times had no coverage of this event, which was attended by a number of admitted pedophiles – or, as this conference re-labeled them, "minor-attracted persons."

Among "highlights" of this conference, as reported by Barber and Reisman:

Pedophiles are "unfairly stigmatized and demonized" by society.


"Anglo-Americans' standard on age of consent is new (and 'puritanical'). In Europe, it was always set at 10 or 12. Ages of consent beyond that are relatively new and very strange, especially for boys. They've always been able to have sex at any age."


"An adult's desire to have sex with children is 'normative.'"


Our society should "maximize individual liberty. We have a highly moralistic society that is not consistent with liberty."


Dr. Fred Berlin acknowledged that it was political activism, similar to that witnessed at the conference, rather than scientific considerations that successfully led to the declassification of homosexuality as a mental disorder.


"The majority of pedophiles are gentle and rational."


The diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders should "focus on the needs" of the pedophile, and should have "a minimal focus on social control," rather than obsessing about "the need to protect children."


Self-described "gay activist" and speaker Jacob Breslow said that children can properly be "the object of our attention." He further objectified children, suggesting that pedophiles needn't gain consent from a child to have sex with "it" any more than we need consent from a shoe to wear it. He then used graphic, slang language to favorably describe the act of climaxing (ejaculating) "on or with" a child. No one in attendance objected to this explicit depiction of child sexual assault.
(Column continues below)


Bill Donohue, president of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, said in a statement:

"The mainstream media never tire of lambasting the Catholic Church for not responding strongly enough to allegations of sexual abuse of minors, yet these very same people show absolutely no interest in reporting on attempts to legitimize pedophilia. Many in the mental-health profession who seek to normalize pedophilia met last week in Baltimore, at an event that was summarily ignored by the media.

"B4U-ACT is the driving force behind this movement. It's goal is to reconceptualize our thinking about what they politely call 'minority-attracted persons.' If they had it their way, sex between adults and minors would no longer be taboo, and pedophilia would no longer be listed as a mental illness by the American Psychiatric Association."

That there has been no coverage of B4U-ACT in the Baltimore Sun, the Washington Post and the New York Times attests not only to their immorality, but also to their growing loss of subscribers.

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=339113

[Dok]

Santorum: If marriage is for people who ‘love,’ why limit it ‘to just two people? Why not 10?’


If two people should be allowed to get married simply because they “love” one another, then why limit marriage “to just two people?” asked Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum in a recent interview. “Why not three people? Why not 10 people?  […] Why not [allow] nieces and aunts to marry?”

The former senator was responding to the arguments of gay “marriage” advocates, who say two people of the same sex who are in love should be allowed to “marry.”

“If marriage means ‘anyone who is in love,’ well, then, let everybody who is in love get married,” added the senator wryly.

Santorum made the remarks during an interview with Douglas Burns, co-publisher of The Carroll Daily Times Herald, last Thursday, August 25th.

Burns grilled the presidential candidate on his views about homosexual “marriage,” asking him, “How does the fact that there are a handful of gay couples married in Carroll [Iowa] affect my heterosexual life and your heterosexual life?”

“Because it changes the definition of an intrinsic element of society in a way that minimizes what that bond means to society,” retorted Santorum.

“Marriage is what marriage is. Marriage was around before government said what it was.”

The presidential candidate outlined a clearly definition of marriage, saying that it is exclusively a “union between a man and a woman […] for the purposes of having and rearing children and for the benefit of both the man and the woman involved in that relationship.”

Santorum argued that marriage is an “intrinsic value to society” because it creates “stable families of men and woman bonded together to raise children.”

“Young children are being indoctrinated as to what normal is.”

REST: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/santorum-if-marriage-is-for-people-who-love-why-limit-it-to-just-two-people

[ScipioAfricanus]

Gay Marriage is wrong, because God said so. If politicians are using naturalistic arguments they will inevitably fail. God determines what a marriage is, since God ordained marriage as a covenantal institution, not man.

[Brocke]

its the predicted out come in the end times. it is only going to get worse, and Jesus is soon about to judge this world and especially this nation. Amerika is one of the nastiest degenerate places on the planet, and soon Jesus will pass judgment. 

Rom 1:18  For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness;
Rom 1:19  Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.
Rom 1:20  For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
Rom 1:21  Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
Rom 1:22  Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
Rom 1:23  And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.
Rom 1:24  Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:
Rom 1:25  Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.
Rom 1:26  For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:
Rom 1:27  And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.
Rom 1:28  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;
Rom 1:29  Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Rom 1:30  Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31  Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Rom 1:32  Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.

Oh good, bible bashing has crept into the main forum. The end is nigh indeed.

[Femacamper]

Let's just marry everything to everything, then be done with the tired old and outdated institution of God-ordained marriage.

Next up, necrosexual marriages!

[Overcast]

I want to legally marry weed.
That's right, weed. Marijuana!

If I'm married to it, then will it be legal to smoke it? Cause it would kinda be like making out with it?

Is it legal yet? No? I'm suing!!!!!

[Geolibertarian]

Bottom line: the State has no more rightful business licensing marriages (heterosexual or otherwise) than it has licensing friendships.

---------------------------------------

SEPARATION OF MARRIAGE AND STATE
  
By Debbie O'Hara
August 24, 2003
NewsWithViews.com

Christians are up in arms about the onslaught of anti-family bills that the homosexual activists have been pushing around the country, many of which have passed. Here in California, our governor, in his desperation to try and hang onto his job at any cost says he intends to sign a gay "marriage" bill even though it has more hurdles to pass before reaching his desk. As usual everyone is blaming the atheists and the liberals for trying to destroy God's institution of marriage, but who really deserves the blame? Who gave government the right to interfere with marriage in the first place?

There is now a blur between the supposed "liberal" Democrats, who many people think are godless, and the so-called "conservative" Republicans, where most people who consider themselves Christians reside. They both believe that government is the answer to every problem. The Democrats are probably more honest because at least they admit that they think government is the answer to all of society's problems while the Republicans say they believe in "smaller government" and "individual responsibility" while voting for more socialist government intervention programs, including those regarding marriage.

Right now Christians are championing a federal amendment that's floating around Capitol Hill that says we must keep marriage between one man and one woman. Isn't that what got us into trouble in the first place, getting government involved in marriage? If we allow government to define marriage even if they define it as between one man and one woman, what is to keep them from changing its definition later on to something else? There is no Constitutional or biblical foundation for government to define or regulate marriage. Why did we hand God's institution of marriage over to government in the first place? We even handed it over on a silver platter when Christians decided that being married in the sight of God wasn't good enough; we wanted to get permission from the government via a state license! God's Holy State of Matrimony then became a civil union effectively regulated and controlled by the State. If we continue to allow the state to control marriage, we will see polygamy, two men and a woman, three women and a man, a man and his dog, etc. and probably worse being defined as marriage. And we Christians will be to blame!

Carrying government control of marriage to its logical conclusion, they would also control any product of that marriage, like the children. Should it surprise us that the State is defining what proper parenting is? We get angry and wonder what makes them think that they have the right to push the homosexual agenda and other perversions on our children in the government schools, but why wouldn't they have that right? They control what they permit us to do through the licensing process.

[Continued...]

---------------------------------------

http://www.mises.org/story/2209
http://www.lewrockwell.com/gregory/gregory68.html

[Femacamper]

I want to legally marry weed.
That's right, weed. Marijuana!

If I'm married to it, then will it be legal to smoke it? Cause it would kinda be like making out with it?

Is it legal yet? No? I'm suing!!!!!

Marriage-a-wanna?

[Kilika]

I want to legally marry weed.
That's right, weed. Marijuana!

If I'm married to it, then will it be legal to smoke it? Cause it would kinda be like making out with it?

Is it legal yet? No? I'm suing!!!!!

Hey, if you want to set your spouse on fire and burn them to a pile of ashes, that's up to you. Wouldn't that be spousal abuse?

[Femacamper]

Hey, if you want to set your spouse on fire and burn them to a pile of ashes, that's up to you. Wouldn't that be spousal abuse?

I think he's referring to weed in general, not a specific hash. So at worst, he'd only be burning an effigy of his spouse.

[Kilika]

 

[Overcast]

Hey, if you want to set your spouse on fire and burn them to a pile of ashes, that's up to you. Wouldn't that be spousal abuse?

I just wouldn't inhale...  

But really - I don't see how they can go pushing for gay-marriage laws, but yet the DOJ is busting these polygamists....

If our government is nothing else - the one thing they CERTAINLY are; is hypocritical.

[Georgiacopguy]

The thing that always gets me, is that as one peruses the Bible, you see multiple references to multiple wives, as well as multiple concubines. how do we as modern Christians account for those inconsistencies, when God nor the Bible address those issues at face value at the time of writing?

[Overcast]

The thing that always gets me, is that as one peruses the Bible, you see multiple references to multiple wives, as well as multiple concubines. how do we as modern Christians account for those inconsistencies, when God nor the Bible address those issues at face value at the time of writing?

Well, not all those were examples of 'good and righteous' people. Some examples in the Bible are things to "not" do...

Corinthians 7:2
But since sexual immorality is occurring, each man should have sexual relations with his own wife, and each woman with her own husband.


The risk of taking what's in the Bible second hand or making assumptions is that you are subject to the agenda of the person telling you what it says. I'm not willing to be subject to another's agenda in a case like this. I think most of us; just by virtue of us having an interest in the content of PrisonPlanet would agree with that concept. The most I'll ever do here is try to get people to understand it for themselves without third parties leading them wherever... other than that, everything I post is purely subjective. Glad if you agree, but I'll not presume to tell anyone what to believe, only to tell people how I come to the beliefs that I have and why.

I certainly cannot answer all the questions in regards to God and his methods, but I can say that any person can pray for widom and read themselves. Find like-minded people to discuss matter with, etc.

And please no one take that as a dig on them - it's a dig on those that try to tell others what the Bible says and either misunderstand themselves or twist it for their own benefit and INSIST that they are 100% right, regardless of what the Bible says - like MOST major religions do. There's no limit to deception, it comes from the lowest of criminals and the 'highest' of scholars... It comes in the form of crime and in the form of preaching, but it's all deception - just the same.

I find - often - the most of the inconsistencies I had always thought existed, were actually inconsistencies in what I understood.


Keep in mind, many things in the 'old' testament were the 'laws' that governed man. In my humble opinion and what I've heard others comment about is that part of the reason for Jesus - is to show man that the 'laws' won't work to run society in a just way. The hearts of men must endeavor to have a good, ethical and moral life. Laws won't create a utopia - they never have and they never will.

We have more laws than ever before; and more crime than ever before. We jail more people than ever before and have reasons to put more in jail than ever before. They try to monitor and watch everything, yet there is still more crime.. Not even perceived crime - real violent crime penetrates almost EVERY city now. We read articles daily about little towns that you wouldn't ever hear of otherwise with some psycho that's cutting people up, or some teacher who's partying and screwing 5 kids.

But yet, they want to continue to tell us that they know what it takes to fix society? At that, I can only say; the proof is in the pudding and this modern pudding is rotten to the core.

[Dok]

Will Same-Sex Marriage Lead to Legalized Polygamy?

Joe Darger and his three wives, Alina, Vicki and Valeri, are not seeking the right to marry, like same-sex couples in states throughout the country. The Utah foursome simply wants their polygamous marriage to be decriminalized.

Joe, Alina and Vicki appeared Friday on "The O’Reilly Factor," which airs on Fox News. They currently are promoting a book, Love Times 3, which the polygamous foursome jointly authored.

Darger and his wives said they are “independent fundamentalist Mormons” and that polygamy is accepted practice in their faith. As such, said husband Joe, polygamy “goes back five generations” in his family lineage.

Joe Darger is legally wed to Alina. By also taking Vicki and Valeri as his wives, unlawfully, he is subject to arrest on a felony count. Alina told Bill O’Reilly that the four “should have the right to participate in a polygamous marriage.”

If their four-way marriage does not invite enough scrutiny, there is also the matter of their family size. Altogether, the Dargers have 24 children which they financially support, said husband Joe, by an unspecified family business.

Polygamous families like the Dargers explain why most Americans are confused about the Mormon faith, according to a recent poll conducted by Gary Lawrence, a Mormon and author of Mormons Believe ... What?!.

In response to the question “Do Mormon’s practice polygamy?” 15 percent of those polled answered “definitely yes,” 31 percent answered “probably yes,” and 22 percent had no opinion.

In the mainstream Mormon faith practiced by such prominent adherents as Republican presidential candidates Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, polygamy is punished by excommunication from the Church of Latter-day Saints.

Unfortunately for mainstream Mormons, their faith is often confused with that of independent fundamentalist Mormons, like the Dargers, who do indeed engage in modern day polygamy.

That confusion could grow even more pronounced with an increasing number of states no longer restricting marriage to one man and one woman.

If states recognize same-sex marriage, warned New York City Archbishop Timothy Dolan, it may very well lead lawmakers to “another redefinition to justify multiple partners and infidelity.”

http://www.christianpost.com/news/will-same-sex-marriage-lead-to-legalized-polygamy-57640/