BOHICA! Weiner's Bill to Restrict GA

"John Harlow" wrote in message
...

Bush's attempts to legislate morality.

Oh? I suppose you could suggest what some of these attempts were?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040224-2.html

How is that an attempt to legislate morality?

"John Harlow" wrote in message
...

Bush's attempts to legislate morality.

Oh? I suppose you could suggest what some of these attempts were?

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0040224-2.html

This appears to be an attempt to prevent others from legislating morality,
or simply imposing their version of morality from the judicial bench.

"John Harlow" wrote in message
...

Bush's attempts to legislate morality.

What attempts?

So the marriage Amendment is a law of morality? Funny I think of it as not
allowing the Federal Courts to make a national law saying we have to change
most churches religious beliefs. Seperation of church and state is not in
the Constitution, however it does say Congress shall pass no law
establishing religion. If the church tells us what marriage "WILL BE" is
that not establishing religion...and one that clearly a majority of
religious people do not agree with? I have nothing against 2 gays having a
civil union, but to call it marriage is blasphemy to my religious beliefs
and no government has the right to tell me that I have to accept it as
religion. But that is what the liberal courts intend on doing. To make a
person of religion accept an employee as married to a person of the same sex
is a violation of the biz owners right to practice his religion as he sees
fit. There is more to the issue than a gay's rights, there are everyones
rights to be considered.
And Constitutionally no one has the right to infringe on my religion, and
that IS what liberal courts and the Ted Kennedy's of the country intend on
doing.
Speaking of Kennedy, is it just me or what...but how do the people of MS
continue to vote a traitor "commie" (Kerry) and a man who should have went
to prison for manslaughter ( Kennedy) back into office time after time. Bush
can't make a decision on morals.....but it is ok for MA to make the decision
for the rest of the country?
"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
.net...

"John Harlow" wrote in message
...

Bush's attempts to legislate morality.

What attempts?

W P Dixon wrote:

but to call it marriage is blasphemy to my religious beliefs

So don't do it. But by what right do you or your religion tell others whom
they may marry?

Or do you think that your religion (whichever one that happens to be) owns
the right to define "marriage"? What about those religions that regard it
as blasphemous for women to walk around w/o face coverings or with bare
legs? Should they have their way too so those believers aren't offended?

- Andrew

"Roger Long" wrote in message
. ..
Why do you say Democrats? I've noticed the Repubs being much more
interested in what people do in their bedrooms and the privacy of their
homes.

If that is the case, why is that every most major advocates of eugenics,
euthanasia, and rigidly enforced population control are Democrats? That
sounds like an awful lot of interference in the bedroom to me.

I suppose that Dems, who basically run the nation's schools, have nothing to
do with the fact that kids need a permission slip to take aspirin, but
parents are prohibited from knowing about their kids' abortions? Sounds like
a lot of interference in home life to me.

Interference in bedrooms and private family life? Let's see, you can't
discipline your own children any more, are suspect if you even try to teach
them your religious beliefs or moral standards, but you must constantly pry
into whether they are smoking. Naw, it wouldn't be the Democrats, would it?

"Roger Long" wrote in message
. ..
Why do you say Democrats? I've noticed the Repubs being much more
interested in what people do in their bedrooms and the privacy of their
homes.


Well Wiener, bills sponsor, is a Dem from NY.

"OtisWinslow" wrote in message
...
The god damn Dems are our biggest enemy. They believe in freedom
and wealth for them only. They want our weapons taken away so
we can't fight back as they redistribute what we've worked for
to some lazy ass that won't work for their own. They scare me far more
than
a bunch of
camel jockeys.


What do you expect from a guy who has repeatedly claimed that he was in
Cambodia on Christmas Eve in 1968 listening to a talk by President Nixon?
(For the history impaired: there were no US troops in Cambodia in 1968 and
Johnson was President.) Well, you would expect that he would then have the
chutzpah to call Bush a liar. :-)

"OtisWinslow" wrote in message
...
The god damn Dems are our biggest enemy. They believe in freedom
and wealth for them only. They want our weapons taken away so
we can't fight back as they redistribute what we've worked for
to some lazy ass that won't work for their own. They scare me far more
than
a bunch of
camel jockeys.

In fact, what do you expect from a guy who claimed under oath that he raped,
pillaged, and burned, Genghis Khan style, whole villages, shot babies, made
necklaces of human ears, and cut off fingers? Must be interesting to explain
that to your wife: "Well, we were young and out just having a little fun.
Boys will be boys, you know." But then he testifies under oath that he knew
all the other GIs were doing it, too. Such omniscience! A guy like that
might even order his minions to forge some documents discrediting his
political opponents, though it is more likely he expects them to come up
with stuff like that on their own.

The Dems appear to have an office of dirty tricks that would have made Nixon
green with envy. They appear willing to stop at nothing in their effort to
seize power through intrigue and deception.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

In fact, what do you expect from a guy who claimed under oath that he
raped,
pillaged, and burned, Genghis Khan style, whole villages, shot babies,
made
necklaces of human ears, and cut off fingers?

Funny thing is, he never caught any of that on the movie camera he had with
him to re-enact his heroic exploits.
--------------------
“Mr. Memphis, believe me, it would be a lie if I didn’t tell you some years
back, Bob Lee had a problem with the bottle and had some wild times. He’s
always in pain, you know, because of the way he was hurt in the war. But I
believe Bob Lee has found himself in some way. All he wants from life is
freedom and to be left alone.”

“What about medals? Has he ever said anything about medals? Are medals
important to him?”

“To Bob Lee? Let me tell you something, son—were you in the war or
anything?”

“No sir, I wasn’t.”

“Well, son, the only people that are interested in medals are the ones that
are fixing to run for office some day. I went from one side of Burma to the
other with General Merrill’s Marauders in 1943 and 1944, and the only man I
ever saw who wanted a medal or cared about a medal later became the only
governor of Colorado to be impeached.

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

Stephen Hunter, “Point of Impact”, Bantam Books, 1993