Tyranny and America’s Moral Decline

February 23, 2015 by Bob Livingston

Whenever government establishes special “rights” or “privileges” for a perceived aggrieved class (also called a minority class), it does so at the expense of the rights of others. It inevitably leads to law, logic and reason being tied into undecipherable knots, contributes to the power and collectivism of government, and is anathema to human liberty.

Take, for instance, the recent case of Baronelle Stutzman, the 70-year-old Washington state florist who declined to provide flowers for the “wedding” of two men because, as a Christian, she held a fundamental belief that a wedding is to be a union of a man and woman, as God established in Genesis 2:24 and His son Jesus affirmed in Matthew 19:5 and Mark 10:8.

One of the “aggrieved” parties, Robert Ingersoll, had been a customer of Stutzman’s for more than a decade, indicating she held no animus toward homosexuals. In fact, when she turned down Ingersoll’s request for a floral arrangement for the wedding, she referred him to other florists.

The two men received the flowers they wanted, and after the case became news they even received offers of free flowers from others. In other words, they suffered no harm. Their “rights” to purchase flowers or be “married” were not violated by Stutzman. The free market, as it is wont to do, stepped in and provided a solution.

But Benton County Superior Court Judge Alex Ekstrom decided that Ingersoll’s “rights” to be served by a business trumped Stutzman’s rights to set the rules of her supposed voluntary transactions and abide by her faith. Somehow, the action of her engaging in commerce stripped her of her right to exercise her faith. She took no action that harmed anyone. She simply took no action.

Ekstrom ruled that the 1st Amendment protects Stutzman’s religious faith, but not actions stemming from those beliefs that conflict with state anti-discrimination laws. But such a “protection” is no protection at all. It is also a violation of Washington’s Religious Freedom law. It’s also a violation of Stutzman’s natural rights by forcing her to engage in a transaction against her wishes.

According to the Section 11 of the state’s Constitution, “Absolute freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship, shall be guaranteed to every individual, and no one shall be molested or disturbed in person or property on account of religion…” Yet Stutzman has been quite “molested” and “disturbed in person or property.”

The state and the gay couple are now free to sue Stutzman for up to $2,000 per violation and collect legal fees as well, a prospect that may well put her out of business and place her home and savings at risk, according to her attorneys.

In other words, the state’s anti-discrimination laws trump the state’s Constitution — that provides Stutzman a guarantee of freedom of conscious in all matters of religious sentiment, belief and worship — and it also somehow trumps the 1st Amendment, which became incorporated to the states by an activist judiciary beginning in the 1920s (an explanation of which can be found here).

Twenty-five hundred miles to the east southeast in Mobile, Alabama, federal Judge Callie V.S. “Ginny” Granade recently struck down an Alabama Constitutional Amendment prohibiting gay marriage as unconstitutional, opening the door for gays to wed despite the fact that 81 percent of Alabamians voted in favor of the amendment banning them in 2006.

Granade claimed a gay couple had a “fundamental right” to marry. From where such a fundamental right comes, Granade didn’t say, as the Constitution does not mention the word a single time. In her order Granade did cite the magic 14th Amendment — which has been abused like no other by activist judges to create a whole manner of laws from whole cloth. And it is from whole cloth that Granade created this special “right.”

But notice the incongruity. In Washington, the state’s anti-discrimination law trumps the state’s Constitution and the defendant’s rights under the 1st Amendment. But in Alabama, the 14th Amendment, coupled with, according to supporters of the ruling, the so-called supremacy clause in the Constitution, trump Alabama state law.

When the 14th Amendment became accepted law — it was never legally ratified, just accepted as such — it simply provided that newly freed blacks held the same “privileges and immunities” of owning property, owning businesses, buying and leasing land, and moving about freely as whites. It did not create for blacks or anyone else any special status, privilege or rights. For the next several decades, the courts and the Supreme Court held that view.

That changed in 1925 when an activist judiciary began creating a whole new meaning for the amendment. What changed? Certainly not the words. It was a judiciary that began writing law rather than interpreting the law of the case before it. But the judiciary has no constitutional power to write law. Nothing in the Constitution grants the judiciary that “right.”

Governments have no natural rights. Any rights possessed by government are only those granted it by the citizens. When government begins assuming “rights” and “privileges,” it does not possess and begins assigning special “rights” and “privileges” to selected classes, governments become abusive and tyrannical. And when it begins assigning and granting special “rights,” it begins to assume that it can also remove and restrict the natural rights held by the people.

Since the 1920s, the 14th Amendment has been abused for such purposes as to grant “anchor babies” the rights of citizenship, create a “right” to murder babies in the womb, and grant freedom of speech “rights” to corporations via the Citizen’s United case… but not 1st Amendment rights to Stutzman, apparently. It has been used over and over to trump the will of citizens by throwing out the results of state referenda on a whole host of issues.

There are today all types of people and groups claiming special minority status and seeking and being granted special immunities and privileges under the specious 14th Amendment “due process” clause. Public policy is molded on these manipulated minority influences. This is all an invisible charade, an organism, with a totally different and opposite orientation to individual liberty. It is in reality New Age slavery, a benevolent totalitarianism, an illusion of freedom.

One can always identify minority special interests simply because they welcome government intervention and intrusion (socialism) as a net for perceived social inequality, poverty and underachievement. Guilt manipulation, along with all manner of charades, is used to force social and economic equality where none is earned.

Manipulating minorities who are naturally drawn to socialism is basic political strategy to justify government politics and plunder. The principle of government is that political power is maximized by forcibly leveling every individual to the same status of conformity, collectivism, ecumenicalism and serfdom.

The truth goes deeper. Because of perceived social, cultural, racial and psychic inferiority, minorities desire to parasite on government force and socialism to subvert those they envy and wish to imitate.

Collectivism is so well accepted that well-known “conservatives” and “family values” leaders now accept the idea that rights and liberties are handed down from government and not from God. The constant fight between the branches of collectivist politicians is over which group of them is going to increase the power of the state, not who is going to limit state power and how. In this fact alone we find the explanation for why freedom has disappeared in the world. Virtually everyone is a collectivist now.

Collectivism is but the political outcome of moral degeneracy. It seems that no modern politician can be elected today without the support — or least not the opposition — of the most degenerate but most powerful group of all, the homosexual lobby, even though it represents no more than 5 percent of the population.

Collectivists are all about democracy — which is the rule of the majority — except in the cases of the supposedly “aggrieved classes.” In support of supposed aggrieved classes or minorities, collectivists use brute power and intimidation to achieve their ends. This is demonstrated in the number of people who have lost their jobs or positions for merely expressing their opinions or their faith.

Under the various banners of power, collectivism recruits the masses into globalism. Such recruitment is the satanic opposite of human reproduction which is God’s way of creating families. Recruitment is the only way homosexuals can increase their numbers, thus the homosexual lobby’s influence over government, public education, the mass media, legislatures and even the military.

Even those “conservative national leaders” who campaign on a “family values” platform inevitably fold to the pressure of the homosexuals, once they arrive in Washington, the District of Corruption. Note my frequent use of quotation marks to denote the deceptions of modern politics. Sorry, but the English language has been corrupted by those who have stolen these terms.

How has the American nation fallen so far that the masses and the politicians not only accept but endorse homosexuality? The answer is: tolerance. The politicians have taught Americans to tolerate everything except that which is Godly.

Note that all major religions focus on “tolerance.” They tolerate everything but Christianity. As has been said, those who preach tolerance do not tolerate preaching.

The secret truth is that homosexuality is another recruitment tool for global collectivism. Globalism, with its underlying principle of collectivism, is not primarily an economic or political development. Globalism, collectivism, homosexuality, the mass murder of infants and euthanasia are all the result of moral decline on a mass scale.

This entry was posted in Featured. Bookmark the permalink.


About arnash

“When you find yourself on the side of the majority, it’s time to pause and reflect.” - Mark Twain - Politicians and diapers - change 'em often, for the same reason. "Government is like a baby. An alimentary canal with a big appetite at one end and no sense of responsibility at the other." Ronald Reagan "Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views." William F. Buckley, Jr. “The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell The people are the masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert it. Abraham Lincoln “Good people sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.” - George Orwell “Satan will use a lake of truth to hide a pint of poison”.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Tyranny and America’s Moral Decline

  1. arnash says:

    How about this: Children also have a fundamental unalienable “constitutional right”, -a right to have both a mother AND a father! Any imperial judge with 20-20 socialist vision can clearly see that right in the 14th Amendment, right? Some one needs to argue for that right, then when a Luciferian judge rules that no such right exists, that ruling will apply also to the supposed right to a state-issued license for the marriage of homosexuals. What goes around needs to come around and bite them in the ass by their own logic.

  2. arnash says:

    Nadine Faber
    I think a lot of people are missing the point here, they want people to PARTICIPATE, to CREATE, PLAN…. in activites that their faith is against. Again, to put one’s faith that they live daily in a little box to the side is against religious freedoms. God created a “family” to continue the generations and to provide a good foundation for children to grow up in with having both a father and mother. However, goverment has made a lot of laws and social programs that do not encourage marriage, but single and divorced parents.

    Tashia Berman
    If we elect the RIGHT Conservative Senators and Representatives, remain active in our pursuit of retaking control of our country and hold a Constitutional Convention aimed and restoring power to the States and the people, we can turn this around. We must send the right message, elect the right people, hold them accountable and teach our children the RIGHT way.

  3. arnash says:

    Let’s all get serious in a fundamental way, and get down to “brass tacks”. He ingrained religious objection is not something manufactured by her fanciful imagination. It is grounded in the unchanging words of the Bible; including the uncompromising words of Revelation (which all homosexuals despise to the max). Would any sane believer want to have any part of that which displeases the Supreme Being who will judged the world one day? It is all about righteous fear of displeasing the Almighty.

    But atheists have no such fear, or reject it as if it is not a fundamental element of religion. And let’s not bastardize the meaning of religion by ascribing to it only religious beliefs. Actions and avoidance of actions are fundamental, as we see so starkly with radical Islam, they must do this and that and NOT do this and that. That is all about BEHAVIOR, not just belief.

    Rev. Chapter 21-22

    And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

    And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
    And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away.

    And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. And he said unto me, It is done. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end. I will give unto him that is athirst of the fountain of the water of life freely.
    He that overcometh shall inherit all things; and I will be his God, and he shall be my son.

    But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable (practitioners of homosexuality), and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.

    And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.

    And there shall be no more curse: but the throne of God and of the Lamb shall be in it; and his servants shall serve him: And they shall see his face; and his name shall be in their foreheads.

    And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever. And he said unto me, These sayings are faithful and true: and the Lord God of the holy prophets sent his angel to shew unto his servants the things which must shortly be done.

  4. arnash says:

    Tom Stone · Nacho, Sofala, Mozambique
    Hmm, here comes the left citing the Bible in an effort to undermine people’s belief by trying to turn it upside down. But here’s the kicker: The article is not saying homosexuality is sin, but neither is the right to refuse service. The left wants to turn that right into a discrimination case. Here’s my thought: Discriminate away. Go for it. The fact is that discrimination laws were made for PUBLIC (see: taxpayer-funded) services and access. If I want to discriminate against your race, religion, or just the fact I can’t stand your face, I have created a business which gives me the right to do so. I am not a taxpayer-funded individual or business. Now I’m not saying that being a whites-only business is a good idea to open in the middle of Detroit, but there you go: I have the right to make bad business decisions and suffer for them due to the fact I am not serving enough of the customers I seek, or I refuse to serve the available customers. See? It’s purely an economic model which needs no government interference, simply common sense.

    Adrien Nash
    You fail to take into account the fact that some “businesses” are for convenience and some are for necessity. A hotel cannot legally discriminate against protected classes because travelers have a right to not have to sleep in an alley due to discrimination. But a person who sells cigars or wedding bouquets does NOT provide a necessity and therefore does not fall under the equal protection doctrine which is reserved for necessary public services. That distinction is being erased by bastard judges who crap on the American rights of We, the People.

  5. arnash says:

    Jim Chambers · Top Commenter · University of South Florida
    This, I think, may be a solution to the problem that exists with a preponderance of voters, when given the chance, voting against the concept of homosexual marriage and homosexuals desire to have the same benefits as those of opposite sex living together as legally married.
    All government should disassociate itself from licensing and stop giving any special benefit to those living together in any capacity. Joint tax returns would no longer be permitted and one’s personal income alone would be the only determiner of one’s tax burden. No state benefits regarding the marital status should be given.
    Let the churches and those other organizations with a vested interest deal with the concept of marriage. Let them sanctify and define what marriage is to them and perform the ceremonies they deem appropriate. If two people want to be married and the church they go to is willing to sanctify it let it be so. But, if others don’t care to respect that union that should be their right also. But just get the government out of it altogether. I think a lot of animus would evaporate under this type of system and the plight of this woman may not have come up.
    Failing that, if the majority agrees that marriage is between and only between one man and one woman (which has been the assumption for eons), and that definition is codified in law through a majority vote of the electorate, then the situation of two of the same sex qualifying as a marriage fails to exist as a right, not because of discrimination (at least on the face of it) but because of definition and because of law.
    Under our system eight people (the majority) DO have the right to define and codify into the state constitutions (therefore into law) and withhold that right because that the two do not fall under the definition. To make that unconstitutional the court would have to first redefine, which I do not think is within their power, and then rule against the majority that put that into their constitution.

    Adrien Nash: Along that same theme; the majority absolutely have a right to ban certain substances which are either dangerous and destructive to the individuals who use and abuse them, or are deadly to others, like nitroglycerin. That is how a society regulates itself.

    The Majority rules when behavior is deemed highly negative. In a democratic society, the individual cannot argue that one possesses the right to do anything, including killing someone that deeply insults them (blasphemy against THE PROPHET) because their rights end when they infringe on the rights of others (to live!) to follow the prohibitions of their God or his morality.

    Turning the situation on its head, as Obamacare does; would a pork salesman have a right to sue a Muslim for refusing to buy his pork? That is discrimination! That is the very real flip-side, and Obamacare’s individual mandate penalty has now criminally made it American law! We are so screwed.

  6. arnash says:

    Tony Speck: When you serve the public, don’t be selective. Otherwise create a private club.

    Jim Chambers
    So I have to sell duck tape, binoculars and condoms to the convicted pedophile hanging out at the candy store near the school? I have to rent my apartment to someone who’s credit rating hovers around 100?
    Tell that to the government who restricts our purchases of OTC pseudoephedrine and narcotics without a prescription.
    No, the problem you have with it isn’t concerned with not selling to the public. The problem you have with it is that THEY are determining who to sell it to, not the government. That is akin to telling people they have to buy insurance which, in spite of what Roberts and four other traitors to the constitution said, is NOT constitutional (and Roberts knew it or he would not have had to rewrite the law for them).

    Tom Monfort
    Typical progressive response. The whole idea that it is the responsibility of the government to legislate equality and morality, is tearing this country apart. When the government gives rights to groups based on lifestyle, it can only do so by taking away rights that were guaranteed by the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. The courts have no jurisdiction, under the Constitution, to invalidate or strike down State laws. The republicans created the 14th Amendment and declared it ratified illegally and the activist judges use it unjustly for actions such as this ruling against a law by the state of Alabama. It’s not a religious argument or homophobic, it is illegal.

    Donald A. Mc Farland
    I can see some judges getting assassinated if this crap keeps up. I am not advocating that however. Real Americans (not treasonous leftist scum,) are getting sick of scum liberal judges crapping all over them. American patriots are getting fed up.

    Timothy Sullivan
    Bigotry works both ways. It was religious bigotry that impugned this individuals position of faith in general ,and, I might add Christianity in particular. Had the florist been Muslim would the sanctions been as severe or would they even been brought up at all? Here we would have seen a collision of two PC crusades; gay rights versus tolerance of Islamic beliefs and practices. Whose “rights” would trump whose then?

    Colleen Buchanan ·
    Everyone dies on this planet. There is no vengeful God. No, there will be no God killing these gays to get even with them. God is a forgiving God, not a vengeful one. Anyone who believes he is all about revenge, has no true relationship with God. There is no hell. Hell is an invention of man to keep the faithful fearful and running to the church for salvation.

    I am a lesbian, I believe in God and have a very good relationship with God. What God does not like is hate. People who hate others just because a book written by men say the “others” are bad and they are sinners. Well read your bible, everyone is a sinner and no sin is greater than another. No man is greater than another either. We are all equal. No matter what any book says.

    “Granade claimed a gay couple had a “fundamental right” to marry.” Granade is correct. Religion does not own marriage. God of the bible is in charge of Holy Matrimony. The government oversees marriage as it has since marriage was invented by man as a legal contract between two adults. I’d like to include “consenting adults” but back in the day and even at times today, women are sold into bondage through the act of marriage.

    Marriage is a fundamental right, as tax payers and free citizens of the USA, homosexuals have a right to get married. Gay marriage is not a special right, it is a fundamental right for all. It was a special right when only select groups of people were allowed to marry while others couldn’t. I still have yet to see any Christian set up a collection fund for what they perceive as a wrongly persecuted, flower shop owner. Aren’t Christians suppose to take care of their own, not just sit around hurling insults and casting judgement and promoting hate and anger? This is exactly why I left the Christian faith. Too much negativity and hate in it.

    The church uses it’s power to hurt people more often than it does to help people. The church promotes hate and bigotry. The Pope is being verbally assaulted by the religious hater mongers because he’s trying to end bigotry and hate within the religions (I say religions because there are so many split variations of Christianity. Because of the multitude of different religions, all supposedly following Jesus’s way, they hate each other because only one can be the true religion of Jesus. But which one?
    By the way, the gay couple did not bring the lawsuit. The state attorney general did because grandma broke a state law. The ACLU filed a claim on her behalf but is only asking for $7.12 for gas money because they had to go to another florist shop after being blindsided by the grandma who claims she is their friend.

    Adrien Nash
    Colleen Buchanan She failed to distinguished two important points; 1. RIGHTS come from God, not government, but the rights guaranteed by government are the rights agreed to by We, The People in our State Constitutions and the US Constitution. If a NEW right is to be invented, one that has never existed in American history, a right to engage in behavior that was once criminal, then that “right” MUST be submitted to The People for their approval, otherwise it cannot exist. 2. The church is not synonymous with the Christian faith, anymore than Obama’s actions are synonymous with the Constitution.

  7. arnash says:

    James Lowder
    The courts seem to have failed the citizens of this country. So has the government as a whole. The majority no longer rules. It’s all what the special interest groups want. And it’s those same special interest groups and politicians who are destroying this country. Our politicians do not have the backbone to stand up to the courts and tell them that the peoples representatives in the congress are the ones who make law. Not the courts.

  8. arnash says:

    Eric Taylor
    Fred Chitwood try this thought exercise: when did you “choose” to be straight? i mean, sure, anybody can choose to engage in straight or gay sex, but there’s a difference in this case between what you do and who you are. so, if your argument has any merit, when did you choose to be straight? when did you consciously decide to be attracted to the female body and forsook the male body? i mean, it must’ve happened, right?
    but, to the bigger point, the bible isn’t a history book; it isn’t a textbook on psychology, biology, or any other science. it’s a primitive religious text full of inaccuracies. if it was written by a deity, then why is there nothing to distinguish it from other books written by men at the time?
    either way, america is a secular nation, not a theocracy, so even if your book was true or accurate, we still can’t base law off of it. ever hear of the 1st amendment? anyway….

    Pat Lengyel
    Eric Taylor – homosexuality is perversion – no two ways about it – and has been since the beginning of time and has also been listed by psychiatrists as a mental disorder. period.

    Carolina Rocks
    Michael Sarkies – It is not a “curable disorder.” 2 years ago a Christian conversion therapy organization apologized and closed its doors, because it does not work. Sure, there are idiots who subdue their natural urges in the name of religion and live false lives; but they are never “cured.”

    Adrien Nash
    It is definitely a dis-order because it is contrary to the pattern of nature, but that may be the result of either a natural defect during gestation or an absence of an innate gender preference followed by behavior choices. Choices lead to patterns of thought & behavior as actions become one’s “lifestyle”.

    Choices can be changed and lifestyles altered successfully if there is no ingrained innate gender preference present within a person’s psyche. As for the Christian conversion therapy service that closed its doors, how does an honest person know that what you are referring to was not a case in California where a law was passed banning even the voluntary submission to such therapy (totally totalitarian), in which case the service certainly did close its doors and perhaps apologized that it had to cease serving those who wanted to continue with the therapy? How do I know that that is not what you are disingenuously referring to?

  9. arnash says:

    Yep bob! Now what are we going to do about it? It is out there in plain sight for all to see, just as plain as the MSM is biased, so is the court system! They can interpret the constitution as well as you and I! But they choose to make these bad rulings, why we ask? Because it is their intent to destroy the constitution and america as we know it! Their actions speak volumes! Just what are we going to do about it? What are we going to do about the courts, the presidency, the senate, congress, we have all three acting in treasonous manners. What is left for us? Revolution? Naw, these pink pantied little weasels in america wouldn’t fight if their life depended on it! Eric Holder had them figured out, a bunch of cowards!

    Scenario: The Earth comes to a cataclysmic end. Only two ships of people make to an isolated island of safety! They are the only surviving members of the human race. The first ship was full of Lesbians and the second ship was full of Gay men.
    My question is this:
    1. Is the human race done for? -or…
    2. Do these individuals change their lifestyles?
    Interesting, right?

    The gaytheists and fágnostics of Al Qúeerda are no different than the hijab wearing dóuche bags of Islam.
    stephanie wilson omg!!!! i could not put that any better than that!!

    Jerry Branson I have been wary of the LGBT power grab. Idaho has a big fight going over “Add the Words”, matter of our existing minority rights legislation. Many of us are championing for included legislation to protect us at the state level against just such crap as is happening elsewhere in the country about the LGBT crowd getting too big for their britches. With the federal court rulings the LGBT folks see an opportunity to get back at the Christians by trying to force them to wait hand and foot on them on any service associated with gay marriages. So far the predominantly conservative legislature is steadfast in denying their demanded legislation. Perhaps if they asked instead of protesting and demanding submission to them, they might have gotten better results.

    we need MORE of you and LESS of those whose threads/Articles are designed to aid and abet the Establishment Supremacist psychopaths with their tactic of “Divide, Conquer and RULE” by irrational Islamic hatred and distracting ISSUES, instead of PRINCIPLES. like going after or at least revealing the Criminality of the PUPPETEERS, who are truly in CHARGE of Governments and the Banks.

    The existence of Homosexuality goes back as far as written history. ~ Those affected have been tormented, persecuted, stoned, stabbed,beaten and burned alive in a effort to recruit
    a more acceptable behavior . This has not worked, ~ They are still among us. and will always be among us. There can be only one reason for that. ~ ~ Homosexuality is not a choice any more than heterosexuality.

    To attach this anomaly to promote or discourage the political trend of globalisation is as ambitious a narrative as I’ve ever heard Mr. Livingston.

  10. arnash says:

    Cynic the American
    The legitimacy of a homosexual relationship is that both parties are adults and old enough to mutually give their consent to the union. Naturally, a child is a minor, and so is not old enough give consent to such a relationship.

    Adrien Nash Cynic
    Minors are fully capable of giving consent, as are the elderly and even animals (via passivity). But you ignorantly conflated “consent” with “legal consent”, which is a legal matter and not a sociological matter.
    so since minors are actually able to accept or reject physical relations with others, why don’t they get legal “protection” of their “civil rights” to have sex with other children or with adults???

    Is age discrimination not discrimination? Why is sex with other minors not a crime but sex with those of age IS a crime? It is because of a society’s sense of morality and moral standards. Those standards do not have to include sodomy-based monogamous relationships being required to be accepted as legitimate and even worse, -protected with civil penalties for rejecting such a requirement on religious grounds based on “the Holy Word of GOD”.
    Any judge that rejects the foundation of our nation (religious liberty) is a treasonous threat to both liberty and the US Constitution, and should be impeached.

  11. arnash says:

    reply to Deerinwater
    “allow us to go straight to the source of Christianity and reflect on his words about those victims of birth.”

    I hope you do go straight to the SOURCE. When you will reflect, I hope you will notice that He mentioned that EVERY single man/woman is a victim of birth – born in sin. In His discourse with Nicodemus He admited that we can not improve our condition and we have to be born again out of the Spirit. The sentence was – “defective” beyond repair. Before we are healed by the great Doctor we have to admit that we have a problem and then to go to HIM and ask for help. Confess our problem and he will be happy to heal us. I agree with you that a homosexual is not more defective that a liar or any other type of sinner. From my “old nature” I feel like sinning all the time.

    If a person is born with mental problems, should that person be allowed to break the society norms and laws or Natural laws?

    If they prefer to live in whatever sin they enjoy, I don’t have a problem with that. Without a new nature that is all they can do. Where I have a problem is with the aggressive agenda of promoting it to the point of taking constitutional rights from others – freedom of religion. In some countries without too strong opposition they can imprison a pastor who calls that a sin. It doesn’t matter that the pastor calls a sin everything else the Bible calls a sin. Without strong opposition, they are never happy till they infringe on the freedom of others. In the case of this 70 year old woman, how did she persecute them when 99% of other florists in town would have been happy to gain their business???!!!!…. It is this “militarism” which annoys me to no end. An agenda to buldoze the conscience of a 70 year old women. Maybe she is a weak christian according to Paul, but she has a conscience and a right to excercise it.

    Where I have another problem is with redefining the word “marriage”. Marriage is a GOD ordained institution between man and woman in all cultures from the begining of time. If they want certain rights they can create the legal framework for whatever the legislature want to call it (civil union, partnership, etc.) within a secular framework.

    Another problem I have is with the propaganda in schools.

    You see, it is not just their lifestyle. It is their “militarism” to oppress the majority – what they think and what they believe with total disregard to the conscience of others. You see gay pride parades. How many times you see heterosexuals pride parades???!!! You see, they annoy everyone and then they wonder why everyone gets annoyed.

    They had many other florists in town. That old woman had ONLY her own conscience. For me to serve them (even if I don’t agree with their lifestyle) would not be a problem. For her it was, and going against her conscence is sin.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s