Black Christian leaders challenge Michigan courts on marriage definition.

Some in the GOP wish to turn their backs on Christian conservatives and say the Republican party should just stop talking about social issues. They seem to believe a collective mea culpa is the best way forward and that social conservatives are causing them to lose.

Message to the GOP establishment: you are totally wrong and maybe we should change the party initials to OTL (out to lunch). This is the problem with the GOP and all those “inside-the-beltway” consultants and pundits.

If the GOP would actually get out into America they’d understand policy inclusiveness, not just the emptiness of outreach. In the black community, social conservative issues are more unifying than fiscal issues. I’ve often said the most conservative people in America on a Sunday are black.

In 2008, the year we sadly entered into the age of Obama, there were two ballot initiatives on same sex marriage in two populous states that went for Obama – California (Proposition 8) and Florida (Amendment 2). Regardless that Obama won those states, both initiatives won electorate support, to support marriage between one man and one woman.

But Liberal progressives wouldn’t want to admit that a record black voter turnout resulted in their passing. The same has occurred in North Carolina where a same-sex marriage proposal went down in flames. However, when secular humanist progressives don’t get their way, they immediately run to the courts for judicial activism to overrule the referendum of the electorate.

And so is the case in Michigan where on February 25, 2014, Judge Bernard Friedman of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan will begin to preside over DeBoer vs. Snyder, a lawsuit that will address both the 2004 voter approved amendment to the Michigan Constitution that defines marriage between one man and one woman as well as the state adoption law.

The media expects the trial to last at least eight days. But surprise! This is being challenged by black Christian leaders and ministers.

“At a news conference in Detroit, Michigan, on February 24, 2014, over 100 pastors and Christian leaders from the City of Detroit and throughout the State of Michigan will join together at First Baptist World Changers Church, 22575 West Eight Mile Road, Detroit, MI 48219, at 10:30am, in support of the Michigan Marriage Amendment that was passed by voters in 2004. The pastors will bring their collective voices in support of traditional marriage between one man and one woman as a federal bench trial, DeBoer vs. Snyder, is set to begin in Detroit on February 25, 2014, that will debate the 2004 marriage amendment as well as the state’s adoption law.”

Do any of you believe this will be carried by the liberal progressive media?

“We, over 100 Pastors and Christian leaders from not only Detroit, but across the State of Michigan want to send a message that there are yet still pastors in city and State – in truth, the overwhelming majority of pastors — who stand by both our Michigan Constitution and our Judeo Christian values,” said Pastor Lennell Caldwell, First Baptist World Changers. “We believe that marriage between one man and one woman creates the best possible environment for the health and wellness of children. While we agree that every American has a right to choose to live as he or she wants, no one is entitled to redefine marriage.”

There are several vital points the pastors wish to highlight about God and marriage between one man and one woman:

> God created marriage as a covenant between one man and one woman
> God created marriage between one man and one woman to be the foundation for building a family
> God created sexuality as an expression of unity between a man and a woman in the marriage covenant
> God created the covenant of marriage between one man and one woman as a replication of the covenant between God and man.

You have to wonder what will the Reverends Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson, or the onerous William Barber II say about this topic? Or even former Congressional Black Caucus Chairman Emmanuel Cleaver, an ordained Minister? Will they stand upon the Judeo-Christian principles or just be lap dogs for the Democrat party and the secular progressives?

“The issue of marriage protection is not a matter of conservatism, liberalism, libertarianism, Democrat or Republican platforms, but is a matter of righteousness. It is a matter of Biblical principles,” said Rev. Dr. Roland A. Caldwell, Pastor of Burnette Inspirational Ministry.

I agree completely with Rev. Dr. Caldwell and I should remind him that in 2012 there was one political party that had to vote to put God back into their platform — and they resoundingly shouted no and booed. To the GOP I implore you, do not abandon social conservative issues, unless you are fine with being viewed as unrighteous by an electorate with whom you say you wish to reconnect.

And for the record, I do support civil unions, but marriage is indeed between one man and one woman.

212 COMMENTS

  1. Excellent article Col. West… I hope to watch some of this today. I hope some videos of the statements made or resolutions decided at this meeting with go viral. The word needs to get out that the Christian community is not going to sit idly by while these changes to our country occur.

  2. I have said it repeatedly, we need a new party. Tea Party would be a good name. The GOP has been taken over by the old democrats. Their party has been taken over by the communist/socialist bunch. Conservatives of all types need to come together as a new political party, Christians, Catholic, fiscal conservatives, etc. We all agree on fiscal basics and mostly on getting government out of our lives, but right now we have no representation in the federal government. We need a place to come together, a new party.

    • Yes we do and ignore the old tired argument threat a third party will be another Democrat win. It will not if enough of us ban together and fight the IRS intervention. Our first order of business should be their abolishment.

      • I believe more and more are doing the same thing, regardless of what the media is saying. We have so many problems in our Country; it’s hard to know where to start. Then, this morning, the first thing I hear when I woke up is about the cuts on our Military; wish Mr. West would post that article.

      • I just read about the cuts. This comes as no surprise to me as that is why CHUCK HAGEL was made secretary to begin with. (to gut the military) As you and I have talked before, He has no respect for the Country, the Constitution The Bill of Rights, the military or we the people.
        He wants to destroy this country as we know it and this is part of how it is going to get done. He wants WW3 so we lose and get taken over.
        The same reason they are trying to have the veterans who return home to be classified as mentally unfit so they cannot buy weapons. barry doesn’t want them to be able to defend us when the crap hits the fan. Same reason he sends Billions of dollars to our enemies and took out aiding and abetting the enemy from the law that can impeach him

      • I think its part of his plan which I believe is accelerating daily. I hope he gets a fight like he has never seen before. We have men and women still fighting, he brings in Muslims everyday and anyone else they can get across our borders. Yep, he keeps spending ungodly amounts of money every day on nothing important and takes away from the most important ones. Taking away the United States power and to be able to defend ourselves. Yep, he is getting closer and closer to bringing us down to our knees.

      • the one thing he does not count on is the patriots of this country fighting back. He is one for one hell of a shock

      • Patriot, I do that everyday too! In the morning I wake up and then I stand up! Wow! I wonder how many others do that?

  3. We are ready to return our country to moral and fiscal sanity. Now we just need a strong leader…… who would be a good choice to lead? Hmmmmm…..?

  4. Our constitution insures that civil unions are within the laws and provide that freedom of choice for each one of us. The objective of these outspoken liberal gay/lesbian movements is not to create a lawful remedy to this issue. It is already there. The groups have found new fame but have been hoodwinked into working to destroy traditional principles. They have no idea that destroying constitutional laws will eventually backfire on the gay/lesbian lifestyle. Look at the rest of the world, and see that lifestyle is not protected by law – Putin has clearly stated Russia will not accept them, the middle east countries (muslim) murders gays & lesbians, but this new-found strength of the gay/lesbians in this country make them feel powerful. Nowhere on earth but in America are gays and lesbians free to live freely with the protections they would never have under any other system.and they now work to destroy that system. Why? a word that does not even have any meaning for them. Marriage means one thing-and it describes one thing only-the joining of a man and woman into one under God – for the purpose of pro-creating. Anything different than that is not marriage, but a union protected by law. This is all part of a huge effort with huge ominous results-the control of the masses by a powerful government force. All life as we know it will end if they have their way.

    • Gay marriage is legal in 13 countries, some of them for almost 10 years. I’m with you that marriage is a religious rite instituted by God, not man, the definition of which no government has the right to change. But your facts are a little off. Scotland, England, Wales, Brazil, France, New Zealand, Denmark, Argentina, Portugal, Iceland, Sweden, Norway, South Africa, Spain, Canada, Belgium and the Netherlands all have legalized gay marriage.

      • Other countries are other countries; regardless we are America, a Christian/Judean Country and I believe most would allow a union for legal purposes but not the sacred union of marriage.

  5. Finally some in the church will stand up to the secular press! They have controlled the thoughts on social interaction far too long!

  6. Its about time our Christian Leaders come together to show support for what they teach in Scripture. May ALL the States Christian leaders start waking up and coming together!!

  7. While I usually agree with most of what is said and reported here, this is just stupid. I see no problem with 2 people who love one another to be able to get all the same benefits as a straight couple does when they are “married”. And the religious people who will call me names for voicing this opinion just remember what that book you read and interpret in which ever way you do, tells you how to treat people.

    • I agree with you. I don’t condone it, but they should have the same benefits. I think if the Republicans/Conservatives had agreed to them having Civil Unions, we would not be where we are today. Most of all, who am I to cast a stone at anyone?

      • no stones cast but you cannot have it both ways. if you accept it you condone it . You can chose to disa gree and still not show hatred, The Lord if you ask for forgiveness and repent it will be done. and he also says go an sin no more lest a worse sin befall you ….. He says I wish that you were either hot or cold and not lukewarm in which case I would spew you out of my mouth to be cast into utter darkness with wailing and gnashing of teeth. AS long as you are not claiming the kingdom ship of Christianity you are ok.

      • no matter how you want to dress it up homosexuality is an Obama nation in the eyes of God. Pick this day who you will serve. The anti Christ or God of the universe!!

    • I believe It is actually the use of the word Marriage that is the issue. Using the words Civil Union and giving that term all the given rights as marriage would solve the problem of not demeaning the religious meaning behind the word Marriage. If the term Marriage is changed, as it has been used in the eyes of the people as “The Law Of The Land” then it would be in stark contrast with religious beliefs and would belittle, and undermine the Religious aspect of the meaning of the word as for what it has stood for in American tradition and Religious belief. It would be like diminishing the name of God to mean something other than God. Or the word murder to mean something other than murder.

    • So are you saying that if they got the same benefits as a straight couple, but it was called a Civil Union, that would be okay with you?

    • right you are aubry the good book says to love the sinner and hate the sin Therefore we love by not being hateful and mean and we work to change the laws to project the words of God.

  8. I thnk you used the word ” challenged ” wrong. A church can not participate in political campaigns at risk of losing their tax exempt status . Also. I would question why a blk church would want to spend the hundreds of thousands of dollars in court and lawyer fees instead of using it on their partitioners.
    If you read the article, all the pastors are going to do is have a unified
    pray meeting
    I’ll be watching all the cable news outlets for info on this meeting and report back to you , West.
    Ps, West, the judge presiding , Berrnad Friedmsn is a Reagan appointee so we know he will be fair

  9. I personally don’t understand why Swimp’s face is at the top of this article…he doesn’t stand for anything but feeding his own agenda. He’s wears the same suit as the self serving, Al Sharpton and Jessi Jackson…and I do NOT see Allen West in the same light as any of them.

  10. I believe It is actually the use of the word Marriage that is the issue. Using the words Civil Union and giving that term all the given rights as marriage would solve the problem of not demeaning the religious meaning behind the word Marriage. If the term Marriage is changed, as it has been used in the eyes of the people as “The Law Of The Land” then it would be in stark contrast with religious beliefs, and would belittle, and undermine the Religious aspect of the meaning of the word as for what it has stood for in American tradition and Religious belief. It would be like diminishing the name of God to mean something other than God. Or the word murder to mean something other than murder.

  11. why is the Christkiller pressiding ? It’s a Christian issue….why a Jew judge….This is an honest question…..Not a racist rage.

    • not when the kennedy’s are on trial it’s not…..Not when the son of a judge commits murder ….it’s not….We’ll see the outcome of his decisions….We’ll pick up this conversation then …..

    • since when is the Bible just for Christians? it is the word of God. it was delivered far before the word of God became flesh, to get technical, to the Hebrews and those that followed in the ways of Gods word. TY

    • So what’s your point?
      Are you saying Jews don’t belong and America is for Christians only?
      I suspect that America is not the country for you.

  12. Is this the same black community that applauded Robin Roberts when she talked openly about her faith on National morning TV, GMA. The same black community that made her the most likable tv personality , the same people that prayed for her when she developed breast cancer and MDS? And congratulated her when she married her gay partner of 13 years.

  13. I would support civil unions too but all people that live together should be able to have one. The reason is not for lascivious reasons but to get the benefits they deserve as well as homosexuals.

    • what bothers me is they get theirs rights as humans. What they want is “special privileges” because of their choice of sexual taste. When a man and a woman are together for a long time but not married they become common law man and wife. Why should the majority bend for the minority

      • It’s not about bending for the minority, it’s about two people being allowed to declare legal rights to one another. Example: Two women, life time partners, one on her death bed in the hospital. Her partner is refused the right to visit or see her as she is not family. That is not right. Hospital rules should be changed as well. I ,like many people, disagree with the act, but love the person. Love the person not the sin. We as humans should do our best to stay out of others business. I say that then post it on F.B……it an’t a perfect world.

      • because of sexual orientation? sorry. My best friend of 35 years (both heterosexual) was on his death bed asked to see me but they wouldn’t let me in. That’s the way it goes. Bend rules for one bend rules for all

  14. Sorry Mr West homosexuality is what it is, an Obama nation to the lord. I will love these people but I will not except the lifestyle!!!

  15. What are my choices? Support a group of moral high minded black pastors who in a couple months, one will get caught with his pants down in a motel room counceling a “terrible youth”? Or support a young gay athlet who put his future career and millions of dollars on the line when he came out before the football draft ..

  16. This will not be covered. The Arizona Bill of religious business owners looking to deny service to gays will be covered. The coming out of the first NBA gay basketball player on the heels of the first NFL player will be covered. Anything related to the gay lifestyle is hip and can be covered. Anything in the Black community that is considered racial can be covered. Black leaders wanting to keep the traditional view of marriage as between one man and one woman due to their religious preferences and beliefs will receive no coverage. We are getting to a point where even without the President’s mandate of the FCC to spy on newsrooms for appropriate news content that the liberal news media agenda already prohibits all stories and all points of view from being covered unless it is to destroy the credibility of a religion such as those Christians in Arizona.

  17. allen, how much do you want to bet that 93% of those in attendance voted for obama? in these past two elections, race trumped policy when it came time for blacks to cast their vote….

  18. We know that the argument is not really for “equality” but for special privileges. For those who think otherwise, perhaps we should petition all state governments to strike the word “MARRIAGE” from any legislation & replace it with “civil union.”

    A couple would then acquire a civil union license and then choose to have either a judge or a member of clergy officiate. If a member of clergy were to officiate, it would still be called a marriage according to the traditions of each faith, but in the eyes of the law it is a civil union. According to the LAW, however, there would be no difference between a homosexual civil union & a heterosexual civil union.

      • “Special” privileges: Punishment of religion for claiming homosexuality is wrong….being able to “force” religions through legislation to accept homosexuality as moral….taking away the liberty of those who would refuse to participate in a gay union.

      • Yes, it is true Brendan all you have to do is pay attention to the news. Arizona is contemplating law that allows freedom of religion to refuse to conduct marriages to gays as it is against their beliefs the gay community is putting enormous pressure through other groups to get the AZ Gov to veto that legislation.
        So Brendan you are wrong.

      • Incorrect… that is not freedom of religion.
        No one is making religious people change what they believe or change what they preach.
        Not being allowed to discriminate is not the same as your religion being under attack.

        If you want to run a business, you can’t just decide not to serve gays, blacks, christians, people with brown eyes, or whomever.
        That flies in the face of countless consumer protection laws.

        And Arizona’s now vetoed bill would have opened up a whole can of worms, allowing any business to discriminate against anyone for personal religious reasons.

      • I’m sorry, but I do not “check my religion at the door.”

        So, you are not okay with the bar in Hollywood that has claimed not to serve anyone who “seems” to oppose the LGBT

      • No… I’m not okay with anyone discriminating, including that bar owner you mentioned.

        As to why do gays need a political platform…
        Probably because they need one since they are under attack from another political platform.

      • you can refuse service to people on basis of religion or the right to refuse service for not wearing shirts shoes or because you are obnoxious

  19. Just as obama is decimating our military, the Democrats are decimating the black community. This should disgust and concern EVERY American.

  20. equal rights under the law is not a matter to be left up to popular vote.
    We are a nation of laws, a republic, with a government built by our Founders with the purpose of protecting the rights of the individual from what Jefferson referred to a “the tyranny of the majority.”

    And it is a lie to say that banning homosexual marriage is a “defense of marriage.”
    I have been married to my wife for over 20 years.
    If some gays decide to marry, it will not in any way weaken my marriage.

    Where are the laws that make divorce more difficult or criminalize adultery?
    Those would be laws defending marriage.
    Discriminating against gays is not defending marriage.

    Also, check your Constitution.
    If you want to discriminate against gays, stop using religious arguments.

    • “The heart of fools PROCLAIMS FOOLISHNESS.” – King Solomon (Pr.12:23)

      STUPIDITY is produced by:
      1) Ignorance
      2) Choice
      3) Force
      4) Accident.

      Which is the source of YOUR STUPIDITY???
      I would say the First and the Second.

      P.S. “To be ignorant means not knowing, to be STUPID means REFUSING to
      know. Neither is good.” – Alondra

      • Interesting.
        Instead of responding to what i wrote… you just chose to call me stupid.
        Are you incapable of explaining yourself?
        What did I write that you thought was stupid?
        Which of the points I made about our Founding principles and the Constitution did you think was stupid?

        I suspect that you don’t actually have a valid argument with anything I wrote.
        You just want to call it stupid because you don’t like it.
        Bravo.

      • Read my comments above, dude, and maybe you will understand. But I am doubt. You are here NOT for understand, but for spreading your DEMONIC LIES.

        You are a LIAR!!! I read some your comments and my conclusion is: you are a Liberal troll on this Web.

        No more explanation to you. I will not spent my time on you, Liberal implant. ALL explanation in my comments. Chao.

      • I am sorry you don’t like the Constitution and I am sorry that you think American principles are demonic lies.
        I hope you are happy in whatever country you live in and would advise you to stay away from this one.
        You have offered no explanations, just insults.
        Please go back to posting about problems in your country troll.

      • Be SORRY for yourself, dunce. Constitution is NOT what you preach. You, Libtards re-writing history, constitution, laws, etc., etc., etc. So KEEP croaking your LIES.

        “You are of your father the devil, and the DESIRES OF YOUR FATHER YOU WANT TO DO. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does NOT STAND IN THE TRUTH, because THERE IS NO TRUTH IN HIM. When he speaks a LIE, he speaks from his own resources, for HE IS a LIAR AND the FATHER OF IT. (John 8:44)

      • You can ramble on about the Bible all you want.
        However, you need to school yourself on the Constitution.
        You still have been completely unable to or unwilling to explain what i wrote above that you are so outraged about.
        Are you just a troll here to rant about the devil or do you actually have a counter point?

        Was it my Thomas Jefferson quote that made you ramble on or was it my point about defending marriage?

        You can try to answer and present an actual thought related to what I wrote… or you can just rant about lies and evil while posting random Bible quotes.
        I suspect that since you are a troll with a poor grasp on the English language, you will do the latter.

      • WRONG !!!
        On the contrary — I PROVED King Solomon’s point and the Logical TRUTH.

        Good night, dude. You did bored me. Go to your wife of the 20 years.

      • “The heart of fools PROCLAIMS FOOLISHNESS.” – King Solomon (Proverbs 12)

        “A DUPE lays open his folly.” – King Solomon (Pr. 13)

        P.S. The Biblical verses are perfectly applying to the FOOLS, because they are exposing godless IDIOTS’ Mad DERANGEMENT.

      • Since i myself am better educated than Solomon ever was from a much higher technological civilization his saying being quaint have no bearing.

      • WISE men speak because they have something to say; But FOOLS like “cvxxx” because they want to say something to look “wise” in their own eyes.

        “[T]he complacency of FOOLS will destroy them” (Proverbs)

      • Do you have reading comprehension problem?
        King Solomon clearly identified your name “cvxxx”.
        So KEEP returning on YOUR vomits and keep howling at a MOON.

      • You see, you just confirmed your ignorance.
        That was Avshalom, son of the King David, who rebelled against his father. Solomon’s son did not revolted.

        But any way “The son SHALL NOT bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son.” (Ezekiel 18)

        Good night, and do not revolt against your father.

      • Your comments about being more intelligent than Solomon because you live in a technological society.

      • Wisdom and intelligence are not the same. I wrote better educated. Since My mind has several thousand years of combined human knowledge that is accurate.

      • A troll calling someone else a troll, It use to be “the pot calling the kettle Back” good job brendan. You are a legend in your own mind

      • What you call education on the US Constitution appears to me to really mean left wing indoctrination,.

      • When the US Constitution was ratified people were hanged for engaging in homosexual conduct. When the 14th Amendment was ratified homosexual conduct carried a very severe prison term. The US Constitution does not mention or protect homosexuality or homosexual conduct. OTH, it specifically mentions and protects the free exercise of religion.

      • Yes… homosexuality is not specifically mentioned in the Constitution.
        And yes, freedom of religion is guaranteed.
        But…
        Writing law in support of a religious belief is clearly prohibited.

      • Writing a law the defines marriage as an action only a man and a woman can engage in is not hate or discrimination for gays. The law is used to define all the actions a man or woman engage in and whether or not they are legal.

      • 1. Marriage is not only about sex.
        2. Exclusion, by its very definition, is discrimination.
        3. Unless there is a legitimate, non religious argument for the law, it is unConstitutional

      • How the hell do you get that out of the Establishment Clause? And please give a citation of some SCOTUS case which says this.

      • 1-He does not say what you claim. 2-the author’s intent is not used in interpreting the constitution unless it is ambiguous. The interpretation is based on the four corners of the statute. 3-And how do you square this with the fact the 1st Amendment did not, until the 14th Amendment incorporation doctrine came into being, apply to the states. 11 of the 13 states ratifying the First Amendment had established churches.

  21. 1) God created man and woman one for other. (Gen.1:27; 2:18, 21-25; 5:1)

    2) Man breaks his bond with his parents and bonds with his wife. Their relation is glued. (Gen.2:24)

    3) Husband and wife no longer two, but one flesh. (Gen.2:24)

    4) The marriage is God’s Creation, His PERSONAL WORK. God’s definition of MARRIAGE is: ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN – and this bond should be for life. (Gen.1:27; 2:7, 18, 21-24)

    5) “God created MALE AND FEMALE and BLESSED THEM and said unto them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it.’”

    GOD BLESSED MARRIAGE ONLY AND ONLY BETWEEN MAN AND WOMAN — HETEROSEXUAL COUPLE. Only HETEROSEXUAL COUPLE can produce offspring — have children. (Gen.1:27, 28; 5:1-2) (This is also a Natural Law/ Law of Nature.)

    6) Strength of the Marriage Unity
    “What God has joined, no men shall separate.” — Jesus Christ (Mt.19:4-6)

    God’s definition of MARRIAGE is ONE man + ONE Woman
    God’s definition of FAMILY is ONE DADDY and ONE MOMMY, and not two daddies or two mommies, do you like that or not.

    EACH CHILD needs to have the model of Mother and the model of the Father.

    Children in the homosexual “families” do not have those models. They are growing CONFUSED and UNHAPPY and they are embarrassed and humiliated by this situation. I worked with this kind children. I know what I am talking about. This is the most important factor for NOT let homosexual couple have or adapt children.

  22. “You SHALL NOT lie with a male AS WITH a woman; IT IS AN ABOMONATION” (Leviticus 18:22-30; 20:13)

    ***ABOMONATION = DETESTABLE = DESPICABLE = REVOLTING = ABHORRENT = REPUGNANT

    “For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is AGAINST NATURE. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, BURNED IN THEIR LUST for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.” (Romans 1:26)

    Homosexuality is abnormal !!! WHAT is ABNORMAL is PATHOLOGY. WHAT is PATHOLOGY is DISEASE. Homosexuality is a Mental Disease.

    Homosexuality is PSYCHO PATHOLOGY.

    PSYCHO PATHOLOGY = Abnormal psychology is the branch of psychology that studies ABNORMAL, OUT OF CHARACTER patterns of BEHAVIOR, EMOTION and THOUGHT in a MENTAL DISORDERS.

    The homos are using their bodies not for what they were designed. It does not matter if you believe in the Creation or Evolution, the Human body was not created for the Sexual PERVERSION.

    The Homosexual behavior is UNNATURAL and goes not only against God’s Moral Standards but also against the Law of NATURE.

    Here is the NON-Christian view — Plato’s view (428 BC-348 BC) — on the Homo Behavior, based on the Law of NATURE aka NATURAL Law:

    “The PLEASURE IS TO BE NATURAL that arises out of the INTERCOURSE BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN; but that the INTERCOURSE OF MEN WITH MEN, or of women with women, IS CONTRARY TO NATURE, which was originally due to UNCONTROLLED LUST.” – Plato (Plato’s Laws)

    Combining God’s meaning of the same-sex sex as an ABOMINABLE act with the Plato’s “UNCONTROLLED LUST” we’ll come to the “ABOMINABLE UNCONTROLLED LUST”.

    “FLEE FROM SEXUAL IMMORALITY. Every other sin a person commits is outside the body, but the SEXUALLY IMMORAL PERSON SINS AGAINST HIS OWN BODY.” (1Cor.6:18)

      • There is NONE wonder WHY are you soooo Mentally Sick. It’s a result of the excessive watching of the lesbian porn. Or probably you are participating in these pornographic movies. Otherwise WHY would you cover your face.

      • Where in my post did I mention I participate or view porngraphy? Add seeing things and confusion to your long list of mental issues .

      • Your comment just confirms that you are obsessed with the lesbian pornography, otherwise WHY would YOU bring
        this to the discussion. You are advertising lesbian pornography (which is obviously is your interest) by bringing it into the board. And YOUR comments and replies JUST show how MENTALY unbalance and Sexually DEPRAVED you are.

        And as any Liberal PSYCHOPATH you are not just in the denial, but you are ALWAYS accusing People, who are unmasking you.

        Sick Psychiatric HELP. And GOOD one. O’homobama will cover the charges.

      • I wonder how long it has been since someone paid attention to you. Starred in your black eyes and acknowledge you as a person? Not some crazy women to avoid . Put down your bible and welcome the world into your heart. Praise the one and only savior, Jesus with the living.

      • to see an idiot all you have to do is look into a mirror and as far as strength is concerned, smell isn’t everything

      • The wisest man king Solomon would say:

        “As a dog returns to his own vomit, so a PSYCHOPATHIC Lesbian PhilanthroPussy REPEATS HER Idiotic INSENITY.” (Pr. 26)

        And I will add: WISE People speak because they have something to say; the Psychopathic MANIACS like PhilanthroPussy because they want to spew their DEMONIC rubbish.

        And as Ron White says: “You Can’t Fix Stupid. Stupid is FOR-EVER” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0gxKStPXyn8

        I am in the total agreement with Ron.

        As I said above – Seek HELP Deranged.

      • I am not emcombraded with structure. My thoughts are free formed . You get it it not. No one is forcing you to read . If you wish respond to me base it in the issues.

  23. TOP POLLED PROBLEMS IN THE WORLD*:

    #1 = corruption (21%),
    #2 = income inequality (12%),
    #3 = jobs (10%),
    #4 = environment (7%),
    #5 = religious fundamentalists (2%)

    *Source: TIME magazine 3/3/14.

  24. We conservatives need to focus our efforts on corruption, income inequality and jobs for the upcoming election and less on religious fundamentalism. (see below.)

    • Yep.
      When true conservatives speak about conservative economic and foreign policies, they make sense and win people over.
      When people calling themselves conservatives start inserting religion into social issues, they drive away all but the extreme religious base.

  25. Is this a black site? I’m not black, but I think socially conservative blacks should set up their own party because the Republican label will never sell in the black community.

  26. What do you think of the new anti-gay measure in Arizona that would allow businesses to discriminate against gays based on personal religious beliefs?

    • Brendan, The bill to which you were referring is not an anti-gay bill. It is a protection of religious beliefs that keeps one practicing his religious convictions from being sued or fined by the government. This bill would allow someone such as a baker whose religion defines marriage as 1 man and 1 woman from being forced to bake a cake for a same-sex marriage. Participation in support (baking the wedding cake) of that ceremony would cause the baker to violate his religious beliefs. The baker, however, would otherwise sell items to the gay person for other occasions. One of the cases being appealed is where a gay person had long been a customer of a particular bakery. When the gay person asked the baker to bake his cake for his same-sex marriage ceremony, the baker declined for religious reasons. The gay guy accepted the bakers decision based on faith and was simply going to get his cake elsewhere. Then the media got the story and the gay rights advocates sued. The bill in Arizona would allow the baker to honor his religious beliefs without persecution. The bill does not focus on the homosexual issue. It focuses on protecting people of any faith from being forced to participate in things which their religion forbids.

      • The bill was vetoed so it may be a moot point now.

        But the bill wasn’t written so specific to the case of the baker.
        Had it passed, it would allowed any business to refuse anyone that went against their religious beliefs… not just bakers.

        Had it passed the way it was written, a restaurant could refuse to serve a gay man ordering lunch… a movie theater owner could put up a “No gays allowed” sign… and so on.

        The bill would have been further disastrous because it was so poorly worded that it allowed any private business to discriminate against anyone so long as they could demonstrate that it went against their religious belief.
        It would have allowed a white separatist to make his business whites only if those were his religious beliefs.
        In fact, anyone could discriminate against anyone if they could argue it was their religious belief.

        The sponsors of this bill should be thankful it was vetoed because it would have been a complete mess.

  27. Any social, cultural or ethnic group that can’t with two of their own
    kind reproduce another one or more of its own kind can’t by definition itself be a legitimate civil rights group. It’s a slap in the face to any real race, nationality or any such ethnicity.

    • Such a good point. These people are so corrupt they have to make it an emotional pride issue, so they can corrupt others into agreeing with them. Going after the children. Going after families. Shutting down religious freedom, free speech, common sense, and decency.

      • The far-left of the democrate party, the ultra liberals used to be called the lunatic fringe.They are now the main-stream with the media seeking the most sensationalism they can milk from these stories while at the same time enflaming the impressionable, emotionally charge propensities of the young to pander to their vote. How far left can we go before we become a godless communist system where even a democrat will become extent. Dartmouth is a good example of this insanity. A college where the students are in total disarray. I know I’m not telling you anything you don’t already know but it’s just amasing to me this country continues to wallow in it’s own depravity.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here