Yeah, the US is at risk, maybe not in the next few years, but 5 or 10 years down the line, possibly. Just look at how far "gay rights" and gay marriage have come in the last 5-10 years. It's incremental societal degredation aided by a variety of forces. For instance, the Dutch have allowed significant immigration from Muslim nations over the years. In some Muslim nations the age of marriage for a girl is 9 years old. There are supporters of pedophilia everywhere.

Pedophilia is sooooooooooo disgusting and destructive.

I read the story online - tragic. How can a party like that even be legal?

"now how does it taste" - my guess is it tastes the same as abortion, gay marriage, adultery... all baked in the 'my rights' oven.

Freedom,

What I'm waiting for is for someone to sue in a US court claiming that he was born a child molestor...and then claim benefits under the Americans With Disability Act.

Just watch - it is going to happen.

More than ever, we must fight for a restoration of traditional values.

JJ,

Its a nasty stew, and I hope they will eventually start to choke on it...and they wonder why we're in a "thus far, and no further" mood...we can see what happens, and we are determined to prevent it from happening here.

"Just watch - it is going to happen."-MN

Yeah, and prolly sooner than later.

"More than ever, we must fight for a restoration of traditional values."-MN

Definitely!

Well indeed this is sick. I guess in many countries one is free to run on any platform.

Its also sick that you try to equate liberalism with pedophilia. Are you really that lost and hateful, sick and twisted mark?

Seems that there is no level you would not stoop to in order to advance your cause.

Again, very Christian of you to brand those with different views as pedophiles. I am sure God as well as your family would be proud of you.

One thing of interest though is the alarming numbers of child abusers and pedophiles in the Roman Catholic church. Ironic how you bring up this topic.

Being an agnostic myself I could care less about the Roman Catholic church but as been said many many times the pedophilia in the church is actually less than in the general population. Don't let your seething hatred of Christians cloud your judgement.

Mark, I have no idea where you get the idea that this is a left ideal, and again I have no idea where you get the idea that the left belives " anything goes and that if it feels good, one should do it.". The true left (this does not count any american party) stands against evils like this, they more or less believe "freedom ends when you restrict someone elses freedom".

CJ, that wasn't my point. I have no hatred of christians, just a low tolerance of those born again types that feel they are better than everyone else because they have found god.

My point is that these types like to act all holier than thou and yet they have serpents living right there among them. If their faith is the tie that binds and makes them what they are , then how could such things happen in a holy place such as a church.

Of course there is a wide number in the general population, thats common sense since there is more people there. However the ratio of pedophiles in the church is much lager than the ratio in the general population.

All that aside, the sickest thing was trying to take something that people are disgusted with and try to pin it on the liberals in order to advance a cause. Thats is really twisted and sure some wingnuts will rah, rah, rah with it, at the cost of driving moderates away as they see it for what it is.

Mark, please stop desperately trying to villianize those with different views and stick to the facts.

Deleted - Rather stupid, entirely off topic, and long ago debunked.

First let me say I just skipped your cut and paste job from some left wing lunatic

Now onto what you said.

"Of course there is a wide number in the general population, thats common sense since there is more people there. However the ratio of pedophiles in the church is much lager than the ratio in the general population."

That's a flat out lie. Study after study has shown that the ratio of pedophilia in the general population is higher, in fact much higher than in the Catholic church.

Deleted - Off topic

Cj, it wasn't a left wing lunatic, in fact it was a right wing conservative think tank, sponsored by the republican government to boot.

That's a flat out lie. Study after study has shown that the ratio of pedophilia in the general population is higher, in fact much higher than in the Catholic church.

-- What study would you be referring to?

Do any of you lefties actually read what I write? Or is there some anti-Noonan blog out there giving you mindless talking points?

I didn't say that liberalism and/or leftism is in favor of child molesting - I merely pointed out that the liberal/left errosion of traditional values is at the bottom of this latest, most disgusting development.

It was the liberal/left side which was telling us all to lighten up this past century - don't be so hung up, went the mantra - what is a little nudity? A little pornography? A little foul languages? And why can't we just talk about strange sex practices? Come one, righties, don't be so square - the naked human body is beautiful and sex is just a natural act that we should all come to terms with and be open and free about...

Right back from the start of this, we advised that if we started to release our instincts rather than be governed by our traditions, then we were opening up a can of worms best left firmly closed. We warned you, you laughed and pushed forward...now you've got perverts setting up political parties to advance the cause of perversion.

Now, pray tell, what do you intend to do about it?

I don't think its good enough to just be content that their vote total will be small...you'll still have thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of these monster organised and pressuring and, of course, being able to help each other out of trouble...

This is the vile stew you've cooked this past century, and I propose that you get to eat it.

You people take things too seriously.
Every government with more than two political parties have a "fringe" group. This is one of them.
At the next election they will win 0.001% of the vote, and that will be that.
Now, shall we get back to the important news?

Axis: "Well indeed this is sick. " - I agree 100% with you Axis.

Just for one moment I am going to tackle this issue using liberal reasoning/logic. I must apologize to you Axis before hand as it is pretty harsh.

The liberal me that so desperately wants to come out is now speaking ;-)

what RIGHT do YOU have to tell people what to do? You say it makes YOU sick, so what? If your neighbor thinks its sick for YOU to walk your dog do they have the right to tell YOU not to walk your dog. It makes you sick because of your personal religious beliefs and morals, which YOU believe, not everyone believes what YOU believe. Get off your high horse (I know you think you are better than these people) and stop telling other people what they can and cannot do.

The age for consent used to be 18 now its 16, what right do YOU have to prevent the age moving to 12. How can YOU tell a child not to have sex? A child can on its OWN (because its the Childs body, not yours) decide to have an abortion. So how dare YOU tell someone else’s child not to have sex. The child's own parents don't even have to know about an abortion so what reason could YOU possibly have to force YOUR personal beliefs on someone else’s child.

Who are you to say what a person can and cannot do? What people do in their own homes is none of YOUR business, stop looking over someone else fence, it doesn't harm YOU at all. Go back to living your own life. Those pedophiles can do and say what ever they want as long as it doesn't infringe on YOUR rights and doesn't break the law. So if a group like them wants to change the law in the US let them get sponsorship from the ACLU and argue a case in front of a judge.

I didn't say that liberalism and/or leftism is in favor of child molesting - I merely pointed out that the liberal/left errosion of traditional values is at the bottom of this latest, most disgusting development.

-- Mark, thats a point of some debate. I can point you to a list of over 100 Republican conservatives that have been arrested, shamed or resigned in the past 4 years for sex with underage kids, gay sex, adultry and much more including Republican cases of bestality.

I hate to remind you mark and blow another one of your arguements up, but pedophilia has been around since the dawn of mankind. It has nothing to do with erosion of traditional values. If it did, then in the past, you would not have any evidence of it. More accurately, it is a negative aspect of human nature. Nothing in the world to do with traditional values, christianity or conservatism or liberalism.

Do any of you lefties actually read what I write? Or is there some anti-Noonan blog out there giving you mindless talking points?

-- Very clearly, your words Marke were specifically meant to draw a parallel between liberalism and pedophilia "

Well, lefties, here's your modern world - child molestors forming political parties. Are you going to feel good if they, say, only get 1% of the vote?"

It was the liberal/left side which was telling us all to lighten up this past century - don't be so hung up, went the mantra - what is a little nudity? A little pornography? A little foul languages?

-- Clearly there are limits mark. This comes on the outrage from conservatives because they saw a flash of janet jackson boobies on the superbowl. This, although not appropriate was totally blown out of purportion.

This is the 2000's, not the 50's anymore mark. Society must constantly reevaluate what is appropriate and what is not. Clearly some things that were taboo in the 50's are fine now. Society must determine those limits so as to move forward.

Just for one moment I am going to tackle this issue using liberal reasoning/logic. I must apologize to you Axis before hand as it is pretty harsh.

-- A for effort, but F for conclusions.

The core of liberal values is that we try to live life without infringing on others life, well being and liberty.

Society and courts have clearly ruled the age of consent and it is clearly not a liberal ideal to allow one to violate another personals well being or liberty.

On the other hand, I notice it is often conservative minded people that deem themselves to be of a higher plane of existance and are therefore authorized to violate anothers liberities with their own views or ambitions.

Good work for pointing out this dangerous encroachment of the permissive liberal mindset on the (underage) body politic. And you're absolutely right. We need to return to traditional values to combat this scourge, especially:

• the Biblical guidelines for regulating slavery in general and sex slavery in particular (Exodus 21:7-11);
• the Biblical guidelines for appropriate women's behavior (I Timothy 2:11-15). Someone really needs to speak to Michelle Malkin & Amy Proctor about this;
• the Biblical method for developing a truly caring relationship between father and daughter (Genesis 19:30-38);

Only then will this country be safe from the pedophiles, which you rightly equate as just another branch of the atheist, liberal lobby.

This is the 2000's, not the 50's anymore mark. Society must constantly reevaluate what is appropriate and what is not. Clearly some things that were taboo in the 50's are fine now. Society must determine those limits so as to move forward.

Uh AXIS, doesn't this sound just like what was just said by JJ, mimmiking what a Librial would say? You can't make it any clearer than you just did by falling hook, line and sinker into your own pile of it. I would further explain it but I don't think it's needed.

Axis: "-- A for effort, but F for conclusions." - typical score of a liberal argument, my point exactly. Scary thing is you used the exact same argument on me to defend gay marriage.

Axis: "The core of liberal values is that we try to live life without infringing on others life, well being and liberty.".

Exactly how do you promote well being? Liberal standards lead to promiscuous behavior which leads to deaths of millions - (one example - 2.3 million children worldwide now have AIDS, but I suppose its alright because you know the parents really have the right to sleep around, and how dare we have any sort of law that promotes faithful relationships).

Liberal standards lead to promiscuous behavior which leads to deaths of millions

-- thats a farce, and a lie. Just as many of you conservatives and including many devout christians also indulge in " promiscuous behavior " Just Have a look here for yourself

Just for the sake of clarity; the majority of the sex scandal that rocked the Catholic church would not be technically classified as pedophilia. Many of the guilty priests were having sex with teenage boys, not 5 and 6 year olds as you would tend to think given the title pedophile. Granted, the boys were in their early teens, but that is because that is the age most altar boys are. I would hazard a guess that most altar boys are between the ages of 11 and 15 or so. These were the boys the priests had access to. Coincidently, this happens to be about the same age the Dutch group wants the age of consent lowered to.

The problem for many gay rights groups is that this tends to look less like pedophilia and more like gay men preying on teenagers. NAMBLA in priest attire if you will. The dilemna for these groups was how to condemn the activity without condemning themselves. The answer was to paint it as pedophilia instead of homosexuality.

I wonder how many Muslims will join this party....

"This is the ultimate degeneration of the modern left "

The state of Kansas is one of the most Christian and conservative states in the union. KS has no minimal age requirement for marriage. If you want to marry a ten year old child and the sick fundamentalist parents give their permission, than it is legal by law.

Lets take a look at the assumption that liberal morals are the root of all evil in this world, shall we:

1. Crusades...pretty conservative folks there...although they did have neat little metal suits

2. Capitalism...has caused more deaths, worldwide, including more than 24,000 per day, due to hunger, than 10 Hitlers or Stalins

3. Illegal war in Iraq...200,000 dead or wounded so far, thousands who will be ripe for indoctrination into radical islam.

4. Slavery...can we even get a real number of deaths and lives destroyed by good ole conservative values?

5. Sitcoms...'nuff said

don't play games mark, you know that people are weirdos, if you wanna lay this at the feet od liberals and progressives, then own up for your own follies

Hi axis

Thanks for the link. I have been involved in church life my whole life so know of a number of people who called themselves Christian but behaved totally against the Bible.

Axis: thats a farce, and a lie.

Please define for me what you think liberal standards are.

In the mean time I will rephrase it:
"Immoral behavior which liberals promote as a persons 'right' lead to promiscuous behavior which leads to deaths of millions"

"Mark, I have no idea where you get the idea that this is a left ideal, and again I have no idea where you get the idea that the left belives " anything goes and that if it feels good, one should do it.". Kiwi

Could be that the defense of NAMBLA by the ACLU has a lot to do with it.

Axis,

Guess I'll have to repeat it as it didn't sink in the first time around: do you lefties even read what I write, or is there some sort of anti-Noonan blog out there providing you with mindless talking points?

No kidding its not the 50's anymore....its not the 50's anymore because for the last 50 years we've gon along with your idiotic notion of society defining what is right and wrong rather than adhering to what is right and wrong.

Your attitude has led to this - a political party advocating child molesting. This is what liberal/left thinking leads to.

phnxbmed,

I could just put up a post demanding an end to all verbal obscenities on TV and that would demonstrate to Kiwi where I'm getting this idea that the left is an anything-goes mentality...

The economically-promiscuous behavior of corporatologists, and their apologists are responsible for the starving of 24,000 people everyday. The unlawful killing of many thousands of Iraqi civilians is morally bankrupt, but everyone here is ready to rah, rah, rah for more death and destruction, you people make me sick, you're all hypocrites of the higest order, when you can get your own house in order, maybe then you will have some sort of standing to rail on other people's morals

No kidding its not the 50's anymore....its not the 50's anymore because for the last 50 years we've gon along with your idiotic notion of society defining what is right and wrong rather than adhering to what is right and wrong.

Like adhering to women and minorities being unequal to the white man. What a better place this country used to be. Thanks for reminding me of the good ol days Mark. The 1950s and before were such amazing times. You could beat your wife without going to jail. You could treat minorities like they were not even human. How dare those liberals question these great traditional values that Mark Noonan wants us to go back to.

Or Mark, are there some things you are glad liberals did in this country? Are there some traditions you are glad we broke away from? Are there some parts of the bible (inferiority of women, rules for being a good slave owner, and all the other messed up stuff) you are glad we don't follow anymore?

Unfortunately, Brokeback, Mark will NEVER admit than there is anything Liberal which is good. He hates Liberals with every fiber of his being and thinks that the only good Liberal is a dead Liberal. He also refuses to believe that a Conservative can ever do anything wrong.

You see, Brokeback, Mark cannot see that anyone who thinks with idealism and hope for the world, if it has any Liberal elements whatsoever, is anything but evil.

Like myself. I may not be a Christian, and may think with Liberal ideas, but I have a VERY high moral value system. I do not even drink, and have never had a "one night stand." I belive in love and believe that all can get along, even if we have different beliefs.

But to Mark, because I am "Liberal" I am evil and have no value system whatsoever.

Mark, the college frat boys, who were mainly All-American Conservatives, were usualy the ones who drank and did drugs and partied and got laid out of marriage in college.

Some of the more "Liberal" people who were "nerds" and "good boys" were the ones who HAD values. Conservatives were mainly the ones who threw away their value systems when they were young.

But Mark will never see this, or see that Liberals have ever done anything good for the world, because he has been brainwashed to think that Liberals are evil - period.

He will never admit that Conservatives can be evil too.

So sad, to have such a negative outlook on life, Mark, so sad.

No kidding its not the 50's anymore....its not the 50's anymore because for the last 50 years we've gon along with your idiotic notion of society defining what is right and wrong rather than adhering to what is right and wrong.

-- That's one of the sliiiest things I have heard you say yet. Society is US, you me, everyone. Who's going to decide what is right and wrong if not the people? The definition certainly isn't coming floating down from the heavens above, so it looks like its up to us people to decide as a whole. Or is your point that YOU should decide for everyone.

Your attitude has led to this - a political party advocating child molesting. This is what liberal/left thinking leads to.

-- See, there you go again. A couple posts above you were denying that you were trying to tie a disgusting part of human nature in with liberalism simply to advance you cause.

But thats exactly what you are doing. And I will say it again, just as many, if not more of conservative minded people get caught with their hands down little johnnies pants as do liberals, because it is not relavent to it.

If what you say had ANY truth to it, then there would be no conservatives getting popped for molesting kids or kiddie porn, when in fact there are PLENTY.

Jimmy Swaggart, James Bakker. The more repressed the greater the sin or so it seems.

"Immoral behavior which liberals promote as a persons 'right' lead to promiscuous behavior which leads to deaths of millions"

But JJ, here's the catch: What you see as immoral I might not. Of course pedophilia is immoral, that's one we can all agree on. But what about checking out your next door neighbor who is sunning herself in a string bikini? At one time Jimmy Swaggart would have said, ABOMINATION, YE ARE LUSTING IN YOUR HEART! Then the repressed little hypocrite cheats on his wife with a series of prostitutes no less. And this came out not long after he condemned Jim Bakker's actions as "a cancer on the body of Christ."

So let us be careful not to get our boxers in a knot.

Deleted - vulgarity, slanders, anti-American statements.

Any further posts like that will result in banning.

Holy Toledo Axis. You made my two examples of hypocricy seem rather paltry!

Ash,

But it isn't something we can all agree on - which is why there is now a political party advocating legalised child molesting.

You see, if you go about saying things like "that might be immoral to you, but its not to me", then we will get into a position where some people are advocating some extraordinarily immoral things.

There are people, Ash, who think that children should be treated as adults - after all, a majority of liberals think a 12 year old girl is competant to make a decision about having an abortion, so whence comes this blanket assertion on your part that child molesting is something we can all agree is immoral?

No, Ash, you either adhere to morality, or you don't - there's no half-way house; there is no partial dimunation of virtue.

Brokeback,

Ah, but those things you use to say that the old morality was wrong are, well, examples of immorality in the past. By the standards of Christianity, slavery has always been wrong, as has been treating minorities and aliens badly. We progress, right? We are supposed to try and improve ourselves, aren't we?

The problem with your side of the aisle is that the only thing you view as progress is that which makes human beings ever more animalistic. Its an attitude of "well, since morality can be hard to adhere to, I'll just call immorality, moral and say that traditional morality is evil". This allows you to think you're off the hook - but you aren't, and the more you advocate moral relativism, the more responsible you are for this sort of abomination going on in Holland.

Mark,

I find it interesting that you can slader liberals with impunity and make wild, unsubstantiated claims that liberalism is linked to pedophilia and adultry and immoral lifestyles,

yet when I post a list of over 150 republican conservatives that are indulging in that exact thing, to prove you wrong, you delete it and threaten to ban me.

Are you that afraid of the truth? Most of these have admitted it or been convicted, theres no slander in listing those at all.

Fact is , that list just blew a cruise missle sized hole in your arguement and you could not deal with that fact.

The reason most people have problems with the extreme Christian right, is that they tend to promote the myth that they live clean, upstanding, moral lives, centered around G-d, country and family. They think its so wonderful, that everyone should live and believe as they do. But we're not all cut from the same cookie cutter. And I don't believe that Conservative Christians are any more moral than anyone else.

Having said that,even as a liberal, I think pedophilia is a heinous crime worthy of the harshest sentence possible. I don't believe in probation or counselling, as the perpetrator would be free to victimize again. So don't try to stereotype morality-or imply that a liberal lifestyle leads to this.

Down the slippery slope we slide...

Cut the legal age for sexual relations to 12, legalize child pornography, and sex with animals.

Next they will want to marry their animals!

Think it can't happen in America. Give it time.

Europe is, or rather has been, several years ahead of the U.S. in their liberal ideology, but the U.S. is catching up -- fast -- thanks to the rulings imposed by our activist liberal courts.

We already have The North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) which according to Wikipedia:

"...opposes the use of age as the sole criterion for deciding whether minors can legally engage in sexual relations. NAMBLA defends what it asserts to be the right of minors to explore their sexuality on a much freer basis. It has resolved to 'end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen mutually consenting relationships', and calls for 'the adoption of laws that both protect children from unwanted sexual experiences and at the same time leave them free to determine the content of their own sexual experiences.'"

Don't know about NAMBLA... Google it. According to the Internet, there is also a women's "auxiliary".

How many "closet" pedophiles are their in the U.S.? Probably more than enough to start their own political movement here!

Who would have believed that the courts would try to force gay marriage on America? They will too if we don't Amend the Constitution to stop it!

Liberal judges, including some Supreme Court judges, already believe their decisions can consider the laws and accepted practices of other nations. Who knows where that could take us!

Sit back and watch it happen, or start working to stop it.

First... Let's get moving on the Amendment to ban gay marriage.

Next... We must stop activist judges from making our laws.

AAR

Mark, conservatives on this site pounced on me when I equated Rev. Fred Phelps with the political right, though he holds many views that some may call conservative, so how do you go about doing the same thing by equating this group to the left? That seems kind of hypocritical to me.

Anyways, there are a couple fallacious aspects to your argument here.

For the purpose of this, I will grant it a given that this organization is on the extreme left of the political spectrum (just as Phelps is on the extreme right).

First of all, you (conservatives such as AAR and Mark, but not limited to them) take the whole "slippery slope" thing that accompanied that Gay Marriage debate. "A man to a man?!?! What's Next!?... A man to a goat?!?!" That argument has no logical validity. You could just be arguing an extreme just to get a point across, but it just makes you look alarmist.

Now to the main fallacy. Actually, the conservatives (and some of the liberals, I must admit) do this alot. This fallacy is the fallacy of composition. Just because some liberals are pedophiles, that does not mean, imply, or suppose that all liberals are pedophiles or that liberalism is intrinsically linked to pedophilia. I am reminded of nice conservative catholic priests and their altar boys. (a cheap shot, I admit, but you have taken your share of those in this post).

Rhetoric like this post merely cheapens the political discourse in this country. You are bringing debate on social issues such as gay marriage in to the gutter, making none the wiser. Are you proud?

AAR,

Keep rapping about your constitutional ammendments, liberal activist judges and yada, yada, yada.

You might be interested to know that there have been over 10 000 attempted ammendments to the constitution since the republic was created.

Only 27 have made it through in the past 200 years. You have a better chance at winning the lottery

Good luck

Axis,

Yep, I gonna' repeat it over and over and over every time I get a chance!

Get used to it... just like I have to sort through all of the repetitive mountain of mush you and your research staff continue to post over and over and over!

Each time, perhaps a few others will wake up and understand what's going on with the Constitution and the activist judges. One thing's for sure, they won't get the education in today's liberal managed schools. (We really need to work on that too. Children deserve a better education, not a trip to and through the liberal propaganda mill!)

Who knows, some day we may luck out and get number 28 and then 29 and who knows where it could go from there. We just need to get the "right" motivated, energized, and movin'!

AAR

AAR, you really crackme up with your constant talk of "liberal activist judges"

Inthe past 20 years, 2 democratic presidents (carter/clinton) have appointed nominees to the courts.

YOU have had 3 republican presidents (regan/Bush Sr./Bush Jr) that have done the same

So, you have had PLENTY of nominees to the courts, more than the liberals have had.

cry me a river.

Georgia Frawg,

Oh, but yes. That it a totally valid argument.

You can deny it all you want, but there is no reason to doubt that it could not or would not happen at some time. Why would the courts discriminate against them 50 years from now as the slide down that slope continues? You are the one who is being naive and denying that it is not a possibility. How can you know the future so accurately that you can say with certainty that it won't happen?

Do you also deny that a father could marry his son, a mother could marry her daughter, a brother could marry his brother, a sister could marry her sister, and so on? Do incest laws govern that?

Well, an amendment takes care of all of that. It leaves marriage what it is, what it was intended to be, and what it should be!

AAR

Axis,

The Dems are the ones blocking President Bush's appointments to key appellate positions by their threatened filibusters, and hoped to block President Bush's two Supreme Court judges.

Why? Because liberal Democrats want to select the judges who will make the law the way they want it. They don't want President Bush to select judges who may not agree with their laws. You can continue to act like that is the way the Constitution meant for our laws to be enacted, but I know better. That was never meant or intended!

I don't have the facts handy, but you are right that Republican Presidents made some mistakes with their appointments which turned out to be among the more liberal judges. I haven't read the history or background on those, however, to know exactly what happened and the reasons.

Hopefully Conservatives have learned from the Dems and will filibuster any future judges who appear to be activist judges. Hopefully, they will insist on future judges who will interpret the Constitution and laws on what it says as well as what it intended at the time it was written or amended.

I'm still waiting on you to come back and defend the "rights" of NAMBLA, and those who want to reduce the age of consensual sex, or sex with animals, or even to marry animals. Who's to deny them that right?

Some animal rights groups already want pets to have the "right" to sue their owner, through court appointed judges. Spain wants to essentially give human rights and standing to apes, chimps, and similar primates.

I would bet that if gay marriage were to stand, the next step would be demands for people to marry their pet dog, sheep, or other animal. I would also expect pedophiles to want to reduce the age at which children can marry.

Are you going to discriminate against them, or are you going to allow them to marry whatever, whomever, and whenever they choose?

Another hypothetical question. Knowing the beliefs of NAMBLA members, and knowing that many potential members would not expose themselves now, and knowing that a gay NAMBLA couple would share NAMBLA's beliefs, what do you think they would teach any child they might be allowed to adopt?

AAR

Georgia Frawg,

I almost forgot.

In answer to your last question... Yes. Absolutely!!!

AAR

Axis,

Do you get credit for deleted posts?

Just adding some more 'diversity' to the neighborhood. Why not embrace those pedophiles that live amongst us? Hey, this is classic equal protection. Gays should be able to 'marry' those they love of the same sex. Pedophiles should be able to 'marry' a 12 year old they love. They probably should be able to 'marry' more than one at once.

Otherwise, we would be 'discriminating' and would be displaying our pedophilaphobia.

And, they should be able to 'marry' Bambi, too, if they wanted to.

Georgia,

For crying out loud, will you PLEASE read what I wrote - what you are doing is arguing about a position you WISH I held in order that you could easily destroy it.

What I am saying is that the liberal/left ideology has led us to a point where child molestors are demanding the right to molest children. This is what happens when you slip into unbelief; as was said ages ago, the worry about unbelief is not that people will believe nothing, but that they'll believe anything that comes along.

The relentless liberal/left secularisation of our society has reduced us to a point where child molestors are not set upon by the outraged citizenry when they seek to form a political party.

The Dems are the ones blocking President Bush's appointments to key appellate positions by their threatened filibusters, and hoped to block President Bush's two Supreme Court judges.

Why? Because liberal Democrats want to select the judges who will make the law the way they want it. They don't want President Bush to select judges who may not agree with their laws. You can continue to act like that is the way the Constitution meant for our laws to be enacted, but I know better. That was never meant or intended!

-- Just as they should when Bush nominates radical right wing "activist" judges.

I remind you that Republicans do the exact same thing when a democratic president nominates an overly liberal judge...

I don't have the facts handy, but you are right that Republican Presidents made some mistakes with their appointments which turned out to be among the more liberal judges. I haven't read the history or background on those, however, to know exactly what happened and the reasons.

-- No they didn't. If the Republican was a moderate, not a fascist neo-con like bush, they he would have sought moderate conservative judges, not fundamentalist christians.

Not even the republican conservative judges are in favor of your views, only the radical right wing ones like Alito.

I have to admit though, that there is some evidence that john Roberts may turn on his handlers and eventually become a moderate as well, so its 50/50 that he would be in favor of overturning Roe v Wade.

The only ace you have for sure is Alito who will rule whichever way his handlers want. Not good odds, considering the rest are moderates and liberals.

What I am saying is that the liberal/left ideology has led us to a point where child molestors are demanding the right to molest children.

-- Mark, you keep avoiding the question, because there no way you can anwer without contradicting yourself.

Earlier I posted a list of over 150 Republican conservatives that have molested kids, committed adultry and have lived immoral lifestyles.

So if those are all "liberal ideals" , who do so many conservatives choose adopt it and molest their kids and others?

Mark,

I would assume an enlightened christian such as yourself finds neo-Nazi and racist groups such as KKK horrible, and that they dont merit time, or attention, or money from sane individuals. But our constitution, allows for these people to speak, and gather, and have picnics on the washington mall, if they get the right approvals. So, in saying that liberal ideals have led to the thinking of these people is silly, these folks exist everywhere, you are upset they have the audacity to come out, using our own framework of the constitution aginst all us moral-eagles, while I may detest your views, I will fight to my last breath to defend your right to say them, THAT is what makes america great, and that is why when the eventual time that a NAMBLA makes a bid to join the political process here, they will be beaten back into the slimy holes they climbed out of, and I will be the proudest lefty moonbat in the world, that the greatest ideal ever created by the geniuses that were our forefathers has again stood up to adversity and triumphed...progress, its the wave of the future!

Well, lefties, here's your modern world - child molestors forming political parties. Are you going to feel good if they, say, only get 1% of the vote?

This statement not to subtly implies that liberalism lead to this. To an extent, it did, just as Conservatism lead to the rise of Rev. Fred Phelps.

What you are generally implying, and AAR flat out said, was that liberal courts and liberalism will lead to legalized child molestation. That, of course, implies that all or most liberals either like or will like child molestation, which demonstrates the composition fallacy, and AAR, I would love to see you argue a slippery slope in court. You'd get laughed out of the room.

Everybody has the right to demand any rights that they want (Phelps and killing gay people, for instance), it is a matter of legislation and the judiciary that determines what rights people actually have, and I am willing to place a $20 bet on child molestation not becoming a right in 50 years, even with the accepting of Gay Marriage.

Mark---Can we agree that pedophilia is a perverse compulsion that afflicts some adults regardless of their political or religious affiliation?
I believe this dark force is present equally in closed and open societies.

I grew up in the '50's and 60's when it was permissable to beat your child into a pulp. It was a less liberal time, when children could not speak out about the abuse and expect help. Sexual abuse of children also occurred, but as in the Roman Catholic sex scandal, child victims did not feel comfortable speaking out. If they did, it was often covered up -children had little or no rights to be heard.

I believe that in a more liberal society-victims of rape, incest and child abuse are able to speak out and get justice in our court system.

Evil and goodness is present in man, I don't believe it is dependent upon a certain religious or political ideology.

no one is arguing that political affiliation has any impact on an adults tendencies towards pedophilia. but what is clear is that liberal judges have been lenient on pedophiles on the past, and the liberal ACLU has supported pedophile groups like NAMBLA.

axis,

Some of us do have other work to do, me included. We'll work on your other concepts later... if not on this thread, then on many more to come.

In the meantime, how about my questions that are more relevant to the topic of this thread (repeated below):

I'm still waiting on you to come back and defend the "rights" of NAMBLA, and those who want to reduce the age of consensual sex, or sex with animals, or even to marry animals. Who's to deny them that right?

Some animal rights groups already want pets to have the "right" to sue their owner, through court appointed judges. Spain wants to essentially give human rights and standing to apes, chimps, and similar primates.

I would bet that if gay marriage were to stand, the next step would be demands for people to marry their pet dog, sheep, or other animal. I would also expect pedophiles to want to reduce the age at which children can marry.

Are you going to discriminate against them, or are you going to allow them to marry whatever, whomever, and whenever they choose?

Another hypothetical question. Knowing the beliefs of NAMBLA members, and knowing that many potential members would not expose themselves now, and knowing that a gay NAMBLA couple would share NAMBLA's beliefs, what do you think they would teach any child they might be allowed to adopt?

AAR

Ever heard of freedom. At least here in the Netherlands one has the right to screw himself up, as long as he doesn't hurt others. Prostitution and drugs are only legal as long as someone isn't hurt or forced. Conservatives always point to the Netherlands as some evil, crazy hellish place. The left hasn't ever been in full control of the dutch government, they haven't even been in the government for 5 years. I thought Christ was a freedom loving person with an open mind. Conservatives apparently do not share the same opinion. The Dutch have limits too, (believe it or not) this party will not get one single vote, it;s just a bunch of crazy pedophiles looking for attention through politics. Look to the facts, we're not spending a single euro on 'The Great War On Drugs'and we have a relatively lower drug using rate and the drugusers' age is going up, you probably won't agree, since a lot of FOX-viewers/conservatives do not believe in facts apart from the ones created by themselves.

Jasper,

Your country is also dying - with a birth rate of 1.6 children per women, you aren't even replacing yourselves...so busy doing whatever feels good that your forgot those little things call faith and discipline which are necessary for a nation to survive. You've got all the drugs and prostitution anyone can want - and you absurdly call that freedom! Meanwhile, the Islamists are making themselves more and more at home in your country...how long before they start cutting off the heads of your whores and druggies? What WILL you do then?

Axis,

I'm not ignoring your question; I'm ignoring your absurd interpolation.

Get with the actual discussion.

kritter,

Of course we can agree on that - but my assertion is that it is becoming more acceptable due to the moral climate liberal/left thought has created over the past 50 years.

Holland, of course, is just more "progressive" than we are - but just as euthanasia and gay marriage started there and have now come here as issues, we can expect that some "progressives" here in the United States will also pick this up as well.

Here in America, of course, we don't form new political parties - what the child molestors will do here is sue under the Americans with Disabilities Act, claiming that they are ill (and, I suspect, they will also claim to be born child molestors) and thus must have protections under American law...things like you can't discriminate against a child molestor in hiring at the day care.

This is the world you of the liberal/left have created - this is absurd and horrifying at the same time. In a normal world, the police would have arrested those perverts as soon as they gathered and proclaimed who they are...in a normal world, when the perverts sue in our courts, the judges would laugh them out of court, and have them arrested...in other words, whenever someone proclaims himself in favor of child molesting, the society would instantly see to it that such a person is removed from any possibility of molesting a child....but, no, you on the left say that everyone has a right to say and do whatever they damn well please...so we'll have people advocating this vile practice, rather than being firmly smacked down by a society which can damn well tell the difference between right and wrong.

This is your world, kritter - how do you like it?

Mark, Leave the Dutch alone, this is exactly why i cant travel in the world anymore without having to think twice where I pull out my blue passport, noone there gives these weirdos any creedance, just like noone here cares what Rev. Moon has to say or his thoughts on how you should handle your penis.

Mark,

We don't like child molestors anymore than racists, but if they wanna speak, then they have the rights to, just as we have the right to shun them from society, just like racists...You know of any NAMBLA members running for office, how about any Klan members, infact the last time we had such a disgusting abboration on our hands, it was Mr. Duke, and he was quite obviously conservative

Eye,

RE: "...know of any NAMBLA members running for office..."

Who knows? Do you think they are going to announce it in public now? It's not safe yet for them to "come out of the closet". But give it a few more years of "liberal tolerance" and "ambivalence" and who knows. It certainly wouldn't surprise me. In fact, I fully expect it to happen at some time; I just can't say when. Look at history. What other conclusion can one reasonably draw?

Considering the number of pedophiles there are, there could be NAMBLA members or wanna-be members anywhere. They could be teachers, day care operators, or really, anywhere they choose to be. Until something happen to make their beliefs, lifestyles, and/or practices public, who would know otherwise.

And gay adoptions -- how many of those "parents" could be NAMBLA members or potential members?

What type of "sexual orientation" and lifestyle would a homosexual or lesbian parent teach to their children? Heterosexual -- to which they object? Or... homosexual and/or lesbian -- which they practice and support? Would a NAMBLA oriented parent teach their children or adopted children that pedophilia (sex with children) is acceptable? Or, would they teach them that the practice was "normal", and "encourage" the children to "explore their sexual feelings"?

What do you think? Really? Not what you want to believe? Not what you feel you must say to be "tolerant" and understanding of others?

What do you really think?

Yes, child molesters, NAMBLA members, bestiality (beastiality -- animal sex) devotees and anyone else can say and speak as they choose. We wouldn't want show any "intolerance" there either.

But what happens when we "tolerate" a behavior like bestiality for example, that most say they abhor and find disgusting? Gradually, people become desensitized to the topic. Gradually people begin to talk about it more and more and become even more desensitized to the concept. The shock effect associated with the practice is gone. More people feel comfortable about the subject and discussing it publicly. People begin to joke about it and treat it as a normal, everyday practice -- true, humorously at first. As the topic become more mainstream and "apparently" acceptable, more people begin to experiment? The concept begins to take on an air of acceptance as we (liberals) "tolerate" the practice. We begin to see the practice included in television shows as "humor". More and more television shows and movies begin to include the idea in their productions -- now as a means to push the concept and practice, and gain public support and approval -- subtly at first of course. Bestiality is now on it's way to being a publicly acceptable lifestyle. Activist groups begin to file lawsuits claiming discrimination and claiming that the Constitution protects their rights too -- they demand the right to marry. Some activist judge agrees and rules that ALL Americans must accept and legalize the practice. We celebrate the first human-to-animal marriage as a man and his sheep strolls down the alter. We pass anti-hate laws to protect their rights.

Suddenly, people begin to wake up and wonder what happened. How could the courts or any rational and reasonable person or judge suddenly claim that the Constitution now affords "protection" and "rights" for a practice that had been against all laws up until that time. How could a practice that has never been accepted as normal throughout history and throughout the history of the United States suddendly be "protected"? The Constitution did not change. The people did not Amend it. Congress and the legislatures did not pass any laws legalizing it. In fact, they passed laws to stop it, but the court said they can't do that! It doesn't matter what the people want. A judge has decided what's best for them! Think about it!

Far fetched. Yes by today's standards, but possibly not at some time in the future. Look at what courts have forced on America against their beliefs and desires already!

Oh, by the way, and I could have included more the typical liberal words like "racists" to discredit the opinions of others, but I'll leave most of them for you.

AAR

eanwhile, the Islamists are making themselves more and more at home in your country...how long before they start cutting off the heads of your whores and druggies? What WILL you do then?

And if the bus drops below 55mph, it will explode! What WILL you do then?

Man, it must suck to live in a state of perpetual guilt and fear like Noonan, holed up making up bizarre theories about how a political party in Holland that nobody (except, curiously, Mark Noonan) cares about is a harbinger of leftist-wrought doom! And how having more Islamic people means the decapitations will start any day now!

Third,

I wouldn't worry too much about the feelings of the Dutch...they won't be around much longer to take offense.

Sees,

And 25 years ago the chances of such a party being formed were?

If you can't see a sequence of events for what they are, then you've really got a blind spot.

axis,

RE: "... there have been over 10,000 attempted amendments to the constitution since the republic was created. Only 27 have made it through in the past 200 years. You have a better chance at winning the lottery."

Hold that thought. You are onto something!

I don't have your research staff to check all of your figures -- 10,000 seems awfully high -- but the point you make is correct. It is very difficult to amend the U.S. Constitution -- almost impossible!

And therein lies another REAL problem -- perhaps the BIGGEST problem -- with your views!

I think I'll save that issue for another time and another thread since others are movin' on and I need a rest.

Stay tuned...

AAR

don't have your research staff to check all of your figures -- 10,000 seems awfully high -- but the point you make is correct. It is very difficult to amend the U.S. Constitution -- almost impossible!

And therein lies another REAL problem -- perhaps the BIGGEST problem -- with your views!

-- It is accurate, there are typically 200-300 a year that are considered. Most never make it off the floor.

But AAR, your second point is where you are dead wrong. Why we will prevail and you will fail.

We, do not NEED an ammendment to accomplish what we seek, its already in place. It is you that needs the ammendment to futher your agenda, so the odds are firmly against you.

axis.

Maybe! Maybe not!

Just what is it that "we Canadians" seek?

Looks like you still don't want to give us your opinions on NAMBLA, bestiality, pedophiles, etc. and defend their Constitutional protections.

AAR

This verse would be considered a good verse to uphold the new marriage amendment between one man and one woman.

Hebrews 13:4.
Marriage should be honored by all,and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

This verse is directed specifically to the gays and lesbians.

Revel 20:8.
But the cowardly,the unbelieving,the vile,the murderers,the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur.

So folks, you can see where we are at as far as "MORALITY" is concerned in America, It's really sad what is happening.

If people in America still knew what the bible says and what it means, but it's obvious that they don't, and if they only knew where their fate lies in all this blasphemous trash by trying to enforce their sickly de-ranged mentality of homosexuality onto the constitution.....

If they only knew what they are doing to our younger generation..........

If they only knew what Gods eternal destination was for them!!!!!!!!.........

OH MY, GOD HELP AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

People we need to wake up and start defending the constitution, the contitution was based upon "MORALITY" and these sicko pedofiles and queers are trying to take control of it, The liberal activist are taking control of america we CANNOT let it happen!!!!!!!!!!!

I listened to a minister on the radio today and heres what he had to say about the whole thing....

Always remember, and I Quote...
The left liberal proclaims about the right christian...

Truth without love......is barbarity.....BUT we should remind the left that....

Love without Truth.......is HYPOCRACY!!!!

You see folks the left is painting the christian people as hate mongers and bigots, we CANNOT let evil prevail.

Folks Marriage is getting an attack from the Forces of Hell.
Decline of Western civilization.
Strength of Marriage is needed.
It's Decimated.Satan wants Marriage abolished.

Folks if this goes into the constitution, It cannot be touched by any judge in the Land,ANYWHERE.

We need to Get up and start energizing people to uphold marriage between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.

Never been a legal situation that was not a moral issue first, can't legislate morality.

Throw someone in Jail and see if we can change their mind.

People, Christian's must draw the line.

Salt in society,If salt has lost it, stop talking, stop voting, calling senators, if we don't stand up, Then we will be treated with spite, and deserve what we GET.

LET'S JUST MAKE IT CLEAR DEMOCRATS ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF M-O-R-A-L-I-T-Y.

KEEP THE ACTIVIST OUT!!!!!!! ONLY FED CHANGE.PERIOD!!!!!!!

FOLKS IF THE HOMOS GET IT THAN WE ARE DOOMED AS FAR AS MORALITY IS CONCERNED IN THE CONSTITUTION!!

SO GET UP AND FIGHT!!!!!!!

Just what is it that "we Canadians" seek?

-- ?? Not sure what you mean? We canadians want to see you get back where you started from when clinton took office; a world respected country and a leader against tyranny, torture, genocide, and human rights abuses.

Looks like you still don't want to give us your opinions on NAMBLA, bestiality, pedophiles, etc. and defend their Constitutional protections.

My opinions hinge on the legality of such actions. If they are deemed to be legal, I don't agree with it certainly, but it has to be allowed as it is legal.

If it is not legal, then it must not be allowed.

I dont agree with NAMBLA, but they have the freedom to express themselves so long as they stay within the law.

Jeremiah,

Hebrews 13:4.
Marriage should be honored by all,and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

This verse is directed specifically to the gays and lesbians.

-- No it isn't, it is also directed at you christian, god fearing folk that indulge in adultry.

Revel 20:8.
But the cowardly,the unbelieving,the vile,the murderers,the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars--their place will be in the fiery lake of burning sulfur.

So folks, you can see where we are at as far as "MORALITY" is concerned in America, It's really sad what is happening.

-- Yes, but let us not forget that it is mostly christians that against the bible and indulge in this immoral behavior, including many of your priest have a great fondness for little boys.

and if they only knew where their fate lies in all this blasphemous trash by trying to enforce their sickly de-ranged mentality of homosexuality onto the constitution.....

-- We are not trying to force anything onto the constitution, jeremiah, you are the only one wanting to mess with the constitution.

People we need to wake up and start defending the constitution, the contitution was based upon "MORALITY" and these sicko pedofiles and queers are trying to take control of it

-- Perhaps the best place to start is to weed out all the christian sicko-pedophiles you have in your midst. Many conservative christians live these immoral lifestyles.

You see folks the left is painting the christian people as hate mongers and bigots, we CANNOT let evil prevail.

-- Thats only because it is true. 90% of racists and bigots are conservative and many are also christians. Good old fashioned conservative christians used to lynch and murder blacks just some 50 years ago. Perhaps you need to practice what you preach and clean up your own immoral acts before you judge others actions.

Folks if this goes into the constitution, It cannot be touched by any judge in the Land,ANYWHERE.

We need to Get up and start energizing people to uphold marriage between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN.

-- This will never happen. The vast majority of america does not see this as a priority. Further, your christian faith is completely independant of the constitution. The constitution is about basic fundamental rights, not religious views or beliefs. Americas will never allow it to be perverted into a theocratic document.

LET'S JUST MAKE IT CLEAR DEMOCRATS ARE NOT IN FAVOR OF M-O-R-A-L-I-T-Y.

-- And neither are you conservatives, who indulge in the exact ssame immoral lifestyles. Talk to use once you have rooted out the pedophile priests from your churches, at least then, we can take you seriously. Until then, you are basically the same as a person advocating for gun safety in the home and then leaving loaded firearms lying around.

RE: "-- And neither are you conservatives, who indulge in the exact ssame immoral lifestyles. Talk to use once you have rooted out the pedophile priests from your churches, at least then, we can take you seriously. Until then, you are basically the same as a person advocating for gun safety in the home and then leaving loaded firearms lying around."

There you have it folks, straight from the horse's, uh... "mouth"!

Well at least axis admits that the liberals are not in favor of morality and believe that everyone "indulge in the exact ssame immoral lifestyles."

Axis also wants you to falsely believe that -- because of the failings of a few on the right -- all conservatives are just as immoral as the liberal left!

And all you hunters and gun owners note too the cut at gun ownership. Oh, he words it in terms of gun safety, but we all know that in a liberal's view "the only safe gun is no gun" -- except of course for criminals!

AAR

Hi Axis

I here what you are saying. It makes me mad to see people live a double life - say one thing, but do something else. Jesus on many occasions picked a fight with the pharisees ('church leaders' of the time) who had double standards. He did this to reveal what really was in their hearts.

However your argument is weak. For example many doctors have prescribed the wrong drugs, killed people, raped woman, ignored the helpless, scammed people of their money, told lies, molested children. Does that mean all doctors are useless? Does this mean I should ignore the advise from a doctor? Does this mean I should not become a doctor? The doctors who have done the things above have not followed their training or the hypocratic oath.

In the same way Christians who have done the things you mentioned have not followed the Bible, and I would seriously doubt their faith. However don't then automatically dismiss something that a Christian says, because of the actions of other 'Christians'. Jeremiah makes a number of valid points. Argue the points on their merits if you disagree with them, but don't brush them off just because of what you have seen other Christians do.

Cheers

JJ

"AXIS POWERS--QUOTE"

"This will never happen. The vast majority of america does not see this as a priority. Further, your christian faith is completely independant of the constitution. The constitution is about basic fundamental rights, not religious views or beliefs. Americas will never allow it to be perverted into a theocratic document"

The constitution was made by good,moral,honest christian people, which clearly shows the difference(AXIS HYPOCRACY) in todays society..................

today's people like "axis powers" want to bring on the old adamic nature and throw off the armor of God so that they might live an easier more sinful life.........Alas my freind they are paving their own road to a fearful eternity, and how they can ignore Gods warning I will never know?
BUT some day when we meet the author and finisher of our faith WHEN WE MEET HIM IN THE AIR we will surely know that, GOD IS GOOD, GOD IS JUST, AND GOD IS FAITHFUL, AMEN, COME LORD JESUS.
________________________________________________

"Axis powers"

You took my words out of context, so you have twisted it yet again.

Here's what I said!.

"This verse would be considered a good verse to uphold the new marriage amendment between one man and one woman.

Hebrews 13:4.
Marriage should be honored by all,and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

Now before you reply "DOPY" ........REEEEAAAAAD!!!!!!!!

JJ,

Are you saying that I'm living a double standard life or Axis?

Because if it is your thought, that I am living a double standard then you are being badly misled!!

Please explain?

axis,

Ye ol' slippery one... let's try again.

RE: "...on NAMBLA, bestiality, pedophiles..."

RE: "...My opinions hinge on the legality of such actions. If they are deemed to be legal, I don't agree with it certainly, but it has to be allowed as it is legal."

Do you support a Constitutional Amendment to make bestiality and marriage to animals permanently illegal?

Do you support a Constitutional Amendment to permanently prevent NAMBLA's from achieving its goals to allow men to have sex with young boys, and women to have sex with young girls?

Do you agree that a father should be allowed to marry his son, a mother allowed to marry her daughter, a brother to marry his brother, a sister to marry her sister, and any other "combinations" people choose?

As long as some judges say it is Constitutional, do you support all of these marriages and relationships?

AAR

Axis also wants you to falsely believe that -- because of the failings of a few on the right -- all conservatives are just as immoral as the liberal left!

-- Aah, but you are asking people to believe that because of the failings of a fre on the left, all liberals are like that. Same things dummy, can't have your cake and eat it too.

Do you support a Constitutional Amendment to make bestiality and marriage to animals permanently illegal?

-- No. This is only because the constitution is about rights and freedoms and not restrictions other than the prohibition ammendment. And it is certainly not about religious views or ideals. Additionally, not necessary, law can be passed statewide to prevent this.

Do you support a Constitutional Amendment to permanently prevent NAMBLA's from achieving its goals to allow men to have sex with young boys, and women to have sex with young girls?

-- Again, no, not required, laws can be passed statewide.

Do you agree that a father should be allowed to marry his son, a mother allowed to marry her daughter, a brother to marry his brother, a sister to marry her sister, and any other "combinations" people choose?

-- No. See existing incest laws already in place.

JJ,

I here what you are saying. It makes me mad to see people live a double life - say one thing, but do something else. Jesus on many occasions picked a fight with the pharisees ('church leaders' of the time) who had double standards. He did this to reveal what really was in their hearts.

-- Agreed. I believe that the great failing here is that we have all allowed this administration to divide us as never before by driving a partisan wedge between liberals and conservatives. Not too long ago, we all had our differences, but also could agree on many things as well. Not true anymore, now you have venom and hate on both sides, usually with liberals on one side of an issue and the conservatives just following the presidents lead.

This president has taken america far off the path and we are not headed in a good direction.

I think the thing that bothers me the most is that this president shares very, very little of the traditional values of conservatives or republicans and yet many conservatives are willing to forget what they value and believe in and follow him anyways. I think this is one of the reasons for the divide. Liberals typically follow their values and if a liberal president strays, we will stand up and speak up and not just blindly follow. when clinton got caught in a lie, many liberals stood up and said so, they did not try to disguise it or hide it as many conservatives tend to do with this president.

In the same way Christians who have done the things you mentioned have not followed the Bible, and I would seriously doubt their faith.

-- As would I. Like Enrons Ken Lay the other week, convicted how many dozen of times and he has the audacity to invoke Jesus and God after he was convicted?? Same with Tom Delay.

You have a LOT of conservative christians hiding behind the Christian banner who are lying, cheating, stealing, committing adultry, committing crimes and much more. This gives Christians a really bad name and also cheapens the faith

Hebrews 13:4.
Marriage should be honored by all,and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.

-- Jeremiah, it is you that is mistaking what the scripture means. What does an ADULTERER mean? It means cheating on ones marriage. That can mean with another MAN OR a WOMAN.!! There is absolutely NO mention of anything regarding a man and a woman, or gays of any kind. This passage is telling you NOT to commit adultry of any kind. Period.

You are reading things into it that simply are not there.

axis.

No, axis. Wrong answer, a cop-out, but as I expected.

No, axis. Laws can be easily changed. As we have seen, even the Constitution is subject to abuse by judges who rule based on their own beliefs, but at least the Constitution is harder to change than laws. If nothing else, it reflects how hard you are willing to fight for your moral values and beliefs... whatever those might be.

No, axis, If you really believed those practices were morally wrong, if you really opposed and strongly objected to those practices based on your own values, morals, and principles, you would say so in the strongest way you could. Even if you failed, you would stand up for your own moral beliefs and principles.

No, axis. By not taking a stand against those practices, you either condone and support them, or you are willing to look the other way, and permit the practice to happen before you eyes, or behind your back, without doing what you can to stop them.

No, axis. You tacitly approve and support those practices by others, even if you would not personally engage in them yourself. If you are not against it, you are for it!

Well, some people do feel they have a moral obligation to take action against practices, lifestyles, and any other thing that goes against their principles, values, and morals. They may well lose the fight, but at least they fight!

They may not have a say or vote in what other countries do, but they do have a say in what the United States does.

Are there any restrictions you are willing to impose on the behavior of others in the areas over which you have a say and a vote?

Is it "anything goes" with any and everything for you?

AAR

axis,

For someone who fights so hard to oppose Christians and their beliefs, you now claim to know all about the Bible!

And where in the Bible or througout history does "marriage" routinely constist of "two men" or "two women"? Rome perhaps -- although, I have never heard of it even there -- but we know they didn't have any morals or values!

AAR

"Axis Powers"

It means what it says axis read it again!!

_____
"all the sexually immoral."
_____

You notice axis, it says "ALL" that includes every individual "MALE" or "FEMALE" in every situation, they will be judged by their immorality in "EVERY SITUATION".

You are so thickheaded it pothetical you have a terrible time understanding or you just don't care, that's it "YOU DON'T CARE".

Well axis I've got news for you bud, You know what God is going to tell you on judgement day he's going to say this "Depart from me you evil doer for I never knew you".

Right now you know what he is saying? You knew me yet you slay me, which leads to consequences later down the road if you don't WAKE UP, and listen, HE'S KNOCKING AXIS, WHY DON"T YOU OPEN THE DOOR AND LET THE LORD INTO YOUR HEART!!......

And all of this non-sense you are spewing forth will clear up, you have an illness I know, and we are trying to tell you just what the doctor ordered, GET A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP WITH JESUS CHRIST!!!!!

No,axis.

RE: "-- And neither are you conservatives, who indulge in the exact ssame immoral lifestyles. Talk to use once you have rooted out the pedophile priests from your churches, at least then, we can take you seriously. Until then, you are basically the same as a person advocating for gun safety in the home and then leaving loaded firearms lying around."

Your statement implies that this is the liberal lifestyle when you say "exact ssame immoral lifestyles". I disagreed with your implication that everyone on the right behaves as you suggest, but you blindly "accepted" it as normal behavior on the left!

So now are you saying you oppose immoral lifestyles of liberals? Or does your statement mean that as long as there is even one priest who behaves immorally, morals and values do not apply to liberals? Talk about shifting the blame and responsibility for ones own actions -- as long as someone else does it, it's not immoral! Have you ever heard of persons who impersonate priests and ministers? I have!

And no, axis. I do not agree or support the actions of a few priests. I would take the strongest action against them. The vast majority are not child molesters; although, you would like others to believe otherwise!

AAR

"AXIS POWERS QUOTE"

"--I think the thing that bothers me the most is that this president shares very, very little of the traditional values of conservatives or republicans and yet many conservatives are willing to forget what they value and believe in and follow him anyways."
________________________________________________
JEREMIAH SAYS,
HOW DARE YOU "SERPENT OF SATAN" SAY SUCH A FILTHY LIE ABOUT THE PRESIDENT!!!

GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE MOST UNDERSTANDING AND FORGIVING PRESIDENT THAT WE HAVE EVER HAD, NOT TO MENTION THE MOST OF ANY PRESIDENT THAT HAS HAD THE GUTS TO STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT AND MORAL IN THE SITE OF ALMIGHTY GOD!!!!
_____________________________________________
YOU AXIS POWERS ARE JUST AN OUTRIGHT HABITUAL HYPOCRITICAL LYER, PERIOD!!!!

Jerry,

I love the way your eyes flitter and your cheeks get all flushed when you get angry, quote scripture to me some more, it makes me hot to trot!

Mark,

Why don't you take control of your site here, and start banning these people like third eye here, If this keeps up I'm leaving and not reading or posting ANYMORE, these people are taking over your site and your sitting there letting them!!!

As for you Third, GET THE BEHIND ME SATAN!!

No, axis. Laws can be easily changed. As we have seen, even the Constitution is subject to abuse by judges who rule based on their own beliefs, but at least the Constitution is harder to change than laws.

-- Of course they can AAR, thats the point. Do you think all laws passed are GOOD ones? Many, many, many existing laws are repealed on a regular basis. Some are outdated, some are shortsighted and some are unconstitutional.

judges CAN rule as you describe, however they must give reasons in their decision to back it up. Even if this is true, it is better to have this then not and risk having the government pass laws that are unconstitutional and having no recourse.

Its like living in a free country AAR, is it better to sacrafice all freedoms in order to fight terror, if so, then why bother fighting since you have given up everything that makes america what it is, meaning that the terrorists have won.

Instead, we need to fight terror without sacraficing our freedoms. Sure, once in a while something bad will happen, but thats the tradeoff for having freedoms.

No, axis, If you really believed those practices were morally wrong, if you really opposed and strongly objected to those practices based on your own values, morals, and principles, you would say so in the strongest way you could.

-- You still dont get it. The constitution and the ammendments are one of the only documents that is FREE of GOD, religious ideals or views and morals. It isa docurine of rights and freedoms, not a docurine of restrictions. To wish to pervert something that has been free of religion for over 200 years is unamerican.

Additionally, its a very slippery slope. Once you get an ammendment knocking down the queers, next you will want another stopping them from adopting kids, then another to stop them from living together, then the hindus will want to get one banning beef because it goes against their religioius views, others would want to ban pork as it violates their religious views. The polygamists will want one allowing them to have a harem full of wives, the muslims will want one allowing sharia law in the USA and it goes on and on.

So is it worth risking allowing others religious views that will infringe on yours in as well just because you want yours? No, its not.

The constitution is not a theocratic document, and thats the way it should be.

By not taking a stand against those practices, you either condone and support them, or you are willing to look the other way, and permit the practice to happen before you eyes, or behind your back, without doing what you can to stop them.

-- Nope, pass laws outlawing it like everything else. Ammendments are issues that are EXCEPTIONALLY important to all americas, such as abolishing slavery or creating civil rights. Your personal religious views may be important to you, but the nation does not share you views or priorities.

Well, some people do feel they have a moral obligation to take action against practices, lifestyles, and any other thing that goes against their principles, values, and morals. They may well lose the fight, but at least they fight!

-- Admirable, but you need to know your adversary and it is wiser to fight a battle that you have a chance at winning rather than take on an impossible to beat adversary. Lobby to have your state pass laws instead.

AAR,

For someone who fights so hard to oppose Christians and their beliefs, you now claim to know all about the Bible!

-- But I dont oppose christians and their beliefs AAR, not until they attempt to make their personal religious views law. You have the right to think, live and believe what you choose, however you do not have the right to dictate to me what I can believe, the way Ican live or what my views are.

And where in the Bible or througout history does "marriage" routinely constist of "two men" or "two women"? Rome perhaps -- although, I have never heard of it even there -- but we know they didn't have any morals or values!

-- for one that complains about things being mis-interpreted you sure do a piss poor job at it. Notice the words "marriage bed" , this is clearly relating to the act of sex, not marriage. It does not say keep your marriage pure, it says marriage BED. Its clearly a statement outlining that ADULTRY is wrong and immoral. There are portions of the bible that do specifically make reference to a man and a woman,however this passage is not one of them

Jeremiah,

Mark's on vacation for a week, but I haven't seen anything that I think he would delete or stop based what I've seen in the past.

Contrary to what liberal posters say, Mark is usually very lenient about letting people say what they please unless it really violates the stated Comment Policy -- even when he doesn't like what they are saying. Even then, Mark lets most comments remain unless they blatantly exceed the limits of the policy. The personal attacks on Mark got so bad a few months ago that Mark set up a separate thread just so they could bad-mouth and attack him. He's more tolerant than I would be!

Almost anything that's posted on this site is going to draw hostile fire from the left, and most of it will not be very kind to the one who posted it. The liberals aren't here to carry on a civil or rational discussion, they are here to take pot-shots, post some of their repetitive propaganda, do some name calling, and check back occasionally for their next opportunity for another round. Topics involving religion, especially Christian, gay marriage, abortion, Iraq, and President Bush, among others, will draw even more hostile fire -- just as Christianity is under attack throughout America.

Take a break and read for awhile when they get to you. Even if you get tired of their attacks, just read what they are saying and let your friends and relatives know what is happening. Don't overload them though, or they will tune you out. Most Americans have no idea what's really going on in America or what liberals are saying and trying to do. The more people you can inform and educate, and hopefully get to vote against the liberal agenda, the better.

If you and others don't know what's happening, you won't get irritated and motivated enough to really get out and do something about it. Just think... if you are this stirred up based on what's being said, how are you and others going to feel if liberals succeed in getting their way?

It's getting late and I'm getting a little battle fatigue myself, so I think I'll let axis and the liberal gang have it to themselves for awhile.

AAR

Jeremiah,

HOW DARE YOU "SERPENT OF SATAN" SAY SUCH A FILTHY LIE ABOUT THE PRESIDENT!!!

GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE MOST UNDERSTANDING AND FORGIVING PRESIDENT THAT WE HAVE EVER HAD, NOT TO MENTION THE MOST OF ANY PRESIDENT THAT HAS HAD THE GUTS TO STAND UP FOR WHAT IS RIGHT AND MORAL IN THE SITE OF ALMIGHTY GOD!!!!

-- But thats the problem jeremiah, it is the truth and it is not just me that sees it, but you have also lost a good 35-40% of your radiocal christian voting base as they see it too. Many, many evangelical christians where are ideal based rather than partisan based like have stepped forward and said that they very much regret voting for this president, he is not a good conservative and shares very little of the values that he claimed to when they elected him.

In other words, he USED YOU. He lied to your face, you believed it and then he abandoned you after he got from you what he wanted. He got you going in 2000 saying he was hot on gay marriage and abortion and then forgot all about it after getting into office. He did the same thing in 2004 then forgot all about it after.

Now hes doing it again and morons like you will buy into it again.

Bush doesn't give a crap about gay marriage or abortion, they are there for money and power. He wants to make himself, his family, cheney and all his biggest campaign supporters as rich as he can while he can.

Bush promised you gay marriage ban and abortion ban in 2000. A lie. Didn't happen. You voted for him, he used you.

Bush promised you gay marriage ban and abortion ban in 2004. A lie. Didn't happen. You voted for him, he used you.

Now they need your vote again, so they introduce a bill they all know will fail to fool all of you into going to the polls again, thinking they are serious about it. After the vote, thats the last you will hear about it until they need your vote again in 2008

Its amazing that this president can lie to your face again and again and again and you continue to believe even though you realize he lied to you, amazing.

This president is a poor christian, a poor conservative and a piss poor president, he is the worst president in american history, he is a liar, a killer, a mass murderer, a torturer and incredibly niave an unintelligent

axis,

Oh, but I might...

Now that you've got your personal insults out of the way, you missed the question. You were probably blinded by my mentioning "Bible" in the question, so I'll rephrase, shorten it, and try again:

Where is it recorded anywhere in history that "marriages" ever routinely consisted of "two men" or "two women"? Or, restated another way, where in history does it mention and document "gay marriages"?

I only included the Bible in my question as it relates to an historical record or account. Some people do view the Bible as a historical book, in addition to a religious one. In your haste to take another shot at Christians, you are the one who jumped to the conclusion that I was "mis-interpreting" what you thought I meant.

AAR,

Axis,

You are the problem axis, you are taking the attitude of everybody else, you don't think about morality and decency and honesty, you just want to go with the flow, well, looks like your'e going to find out the hard way, mister man.

Axis, you are paving your road to hell, honestly you don't go with what everybody else is doing it's not right it never has been and never will be, PERIOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's people just like you, who think like you do, You find you a click and before you know it you are doing the same thing they are doing, but the difference is where are you right and wrong, or evil from good, in this case axis you have found you an evil click and now you are on thin ice.

So listen buddy when times get rough who are you going to go to for help?

Don't call on me because I have already warned you enough times that you should have learned better.

Now here's some more advice get in church and start living right so that you can make the right choices in the months and years ahead like voting for people who uphold there creator as a foundation for this country, GOT ME!! I HOPE!!

And that's another thing axis "HOPE" Just like I said what "HOPE" will you have when the opposition comes your way without the Good Moral conservative people on your side, Something you need to think about I'm tellin you, You bettered wake up!! Start having faith in the creator instead of the cowardly weak minded liberal left's ideology!!!!

You take care, get in the BIBLE and start reading!

AAR,

few documents making reference tomarriage actually define it as between a man and a woman. I suppose centuries ago it was obvious and did not need to be defined.

axis,

RE: "-- Admirable, but you need to know your adversary and it is wiser to fight a battle that you have a chance at winning rather than take on an impossible to beat adversary. Lobby to have your state pass laws instead."

As I expected, you missed the point and purpose behind the questions I asked.

Don't always assume the obvious and that there aren't other reasons and purposes behind my questions and comments!

As you say, one has to learn their enemy! As to what I can do about it, who knows, maybe nothing, but at least I know what is going on. I'm not one of your dumb liberals who believes everything you say. I believe very little and agree with even less of it!

Your arrogance is really amazing. You actually believe that you, your kind, and your ideas should rule all. You do have the naive ignorance and complacency of the masses on your side.

I got the answers I expected!!!

AAR

axis,

RE: "few documents making reference to marriage actually define it as between a man and a woman. I suppose centuries ago it was obvious and did not need to be defined."

Let's try rewording that the way it should be answered...

How about NO documents refer to marriage as being between "two men" or "two women"?

How about until just recently -- "not centuries ago" -- it was obvious and did not need to be defined?

How about at the time the Constitution was written, it was obvious and did not need to be defined?

How about when the 14th Amendment was written, it was obvious and did not need to be defined?

How about when the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled by a single vote majority, it was obvious and SHOULD NOT have been REDEFINED?!!!

AAR

Hello everyone,

I'm Jeremiah's brother, and lately I have been "watching in the shadows" if you will, all the activity on the site. After seeing all of what's been going on, he's gotten me wrapped up into it too. At the current moment, I'd like to say something to Axis.

Axis,

After seeing all you've been posting, and reading your "ideology" I have no regrets in saying that you are a left-wing moron who is too wrapped up in his own quest for self-righteous gain to actually realize what morality is. Your incessant attacks on President Bush and his true morals are futile, you're arguements are flawed at best, and your obsession with Hitler and trying to portray him as a Conservative Christian is down-right ignorant. If you expect anyone to take you, and your rebuttals/arguements, seriously, you have another thing coming. Hitler was not a Christian, nor a conservative, if you can't see that, then you are just down-right ignorant.

Now, let's get onto the subject at hand. Marriage between one man and one woman was defined eons ago when this once perfect Earth of ours was created. God created one man, and one woman. They were to be partners. God saw a need in Adam's life for a partner, someone for companionship. He wanted to make it a person that was pleasing not only to Adam's eye, but also to his heart. It was Adam's counter-part.

This, in itself, clearly defines the bounds of marriage. It is meant to be a close relationship between two-opposites. Just two opposite poles attract, so do man and woman. It is an equilibrium of sorts.

Now, enough of the scientific stuff. Not only did God ordain it this way, he severely punished those who went into Sodomy and gay and lesbian relationship. Sodom and Gomorrah (hence the term "Act of Sodomy", a very bad, bad thing to do) were destroyed and put asunder by God because of the people going into sexual immorality (gay/lesbian relationships). This, in itself, proves that Gay and Lesbianism is wrong.

If you want to dispute this, then turn over and read Romans sometime. It gives explicit commands that Gay and Lesbianism is wrong.

Anyways, it's wrong and it has been proven down through the centuries to be a failing thing. If this country continues down the Liberal Path, and allows things like this to go on, I honestly it is going to bring Judgement upon this nation.

I applaud President Bush and all his efforts to combat evil, he is an outstanding and good President.

Lucas

Lucas (and Jeremiah),

Glad to hear another person has been watching what has been going on. Most people literally have no clue what liberals are doing to America and where they hope to take this nation!

I'm running a little short of time, but I thought I'd make a few quick comments for now. It will be somewhat wordy and rambling, and may have some grammatical error, but I'll won't have time to fix those.

Hopefully many more people are doing and will do the same as you and will begin to see and understand the ideology, philosophy, lifestyle agenda, and "anything goes" lifestyle liberals plan to impose on America.

If you have been reading other threads, you will begin to understand how they are and plan to continue using activist courts and judges to impose their agenda and values -- or lack thereof -- on you, me, and the majority of America -- contrary to the very concept established by our Constitution! They insist that the Constitution to be a "living" document that activist judges -- not the people -- can easily change to impose their agenda. They believe they and the courts have every right -- an obligation if you will -- to do just that.

This is nothing new, it has been going on for the past 50 years or so, but is now being pushed to the point of absurdity. The liberals have lost some their ability to force their agenda through Congress, so they are desperately trying to hold on to the courts and activist judges to continue their "reign".

As you can see by axis's words, liberals have no moral or ethical values in the sense that you, I, and most Americans have. As long as something is "legal" -- anything, as defined by their activist liberal judges -- it is right and moral. Axis and other liberals won't even stand up and say they would support a Constitutional Amendment to ban -- for now at least -- something as abhorrently wrong to most Americans as bestiality, or a marriage between man or woman and their pet or their livestock. Axis and other liberals won't even stand up and say they would oppose homosexuals or lesbians who may share the beliefs of NAMBLA who want to legalize sex between adults and children. If they adopt children, what beliefs are they going to teach their children and where does that lead?

The first argument you will hear from a liberal it that we can't "legislate morality". In general, that may be true, but we do have a right as a society to expect some degree of social values and morals in our society. In fact, liberals do want to legislate morality -- their version... none!

Keep reading the posts and comments to understand what liberals have planned for America.

Select some of their more absurd comments and ideas and ask some of your friends and relatives to read a few.

Print out a few selection for those who do not have a computer.

Encourage your friends and relatives to get out and vote against liberals. There are liberal Republicans, some of whom I would like to see voted out of office, but Democrats are the real liberals. They are the ones who support the ideas expressed by axis and other liberals here.

Don't get hung up on what the liberals and Democrats want to define as the issue. The real issue that affects you and America is their beliefs -- their liberal agenda -- and where they will take you and America if they are allowed to do so. The issue is not the Iraq war, immigration, Katrina, excessive spending, healthcare, or specific issues -- these can be agued separately. Democrats would like to use those issues to get elected, but the real damage will be done later -- not on the issue of the moment -- but their real agenda and the social re-engineering of America!

Read up on JUDICIAL ACTIVISM and understand what it is -- what it really means -- how it is used to change our laws and effectively AMEND THE CONSTITUTION. Read how a handful of judges, even by a 5 to 4 decision can effectively change or "amend" the Constitution by a single vote. BY A SINGLE VOTE judges can do what the Constitution says must require an overwhelming majority of 75% of the states to do! And they meant for that decision to be made by the people, through a representative process, not by a handful of judges as axis and the liberals would like to continue!

Article V of the U.S. Constitution provides two legal and Constitutional methods for proposing Amendments to the Constitution.

-- The first method is for Congress to approve the proposed amendment by a two thirds vote of both the House and Senate. This method that has been used to propose all amendments to the U.S. Constitution thus far and any attempts to get an amendment through to the people by this method will likely be blocked by liberals like Ted Kennedy and even a few Republicans like Specter, whom I consider to be a RINO.

-- The second method is for two thirds of the State Legislatures to call for a Constitutional Convention to propose and draft one or more amendments to the Constitution. This method has never been tried, but it does offer the possibility of bypassing the liberal Senators who are blocking the efforts.

-- Once an amendment has been proposed by either of the above methods, it still must be approved (ratified) by three fourths of the States Legislatures or Conventions (38 States) before becoming part of the U.S. Constitution.

Most people, even members of Congress and state legislatures, are not even aware of the second method -- a Constitutional Conventions. We never hear about it in the media either.

Lucas, Jeremiah, if you, any of the readers, or their friends, or relatives are located in a state with a good conservative state legislator, see if they can help.

Contact your state legislature and ask them to look into the second method and perhaps start actions to give it a try. At least we can be working on the procedures and have them in place waiting for the next unpopular decision from the activist courts. It will come, and at some point, the majority of Americans will say enough is enough.

AAR

AAR,

I appreciate your comments and input on this site. Your concern for the American people as a whole, and your concern for the activities that are going on across the world, are very admirable.

You are putting your great intelligence to use, and I really appreciate that too. I'm glad to be able to post with you, my brother, Mark, and all the others who take a stand on the moral issues. No matter how much guys like axis try to mar and degrade the truth, they only dig their whole deeper when guys like you show the real truth.

Keep up the good work AAR, My brother and I will do the same. It's time we all started finding common ground, and fighting the good fight the way it should be fought, as a whole.

A teacher once told me "A single light shines in the darkness, and can help to guide a person who does not have a light. But when many lights come togethor, they can be as a beacon to the whole world, providing light to many. So, as a single person, we can be effective. But yet as a whole, we can be of much GREATER, effectiveness"

No matter what axis and the others do, I think we have a calling to stand as one and try and show them the truth. Even though it is of little effectiveness, because they shut themselves off from the truth. More than that, we have an obligation to write and tell our senators what we think. We need to do it peaceably of course, but we need to write them.

I really appreciate you and your posts AAR. I look forward to posting more myself.

Lucas

Lucas,

Thanks... and enjoy your weekend!

AAR