End Times and Current Events
June 28, 2017, 09:05:22 am
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: "Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me." John 5:39 (KJB)
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Staff List Login Register  

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

Shoutbox
June 21, 2017, 05:50:35 pm Romans 8 says: Mark, I don't want to flood your pm box. But just wanted to say I emailed bro Scott about this issue.
April 29, 2017, 05:20:18 am Christian40 says: What i'm thinking a strike on North Korea possible on some occultic date May 1? the aftermath of WW3 will bring in the Antichrist? Yeah Mayhem in May?
April 20, 2017, 04:55:44 pm Mark says:
April 06, 2017, 09:26:29 pm Mark says: TRUMP LAUNCHES 50+ MISSILES AIMED AT SYRIA
March 05, 2017, 01:16:17 am Christian40 says: i hope the rapture is this year i encourage You to keep working for the Lord
March 05, 2017, 01:06:24 am Christian40 says: i'm glad that the summer is over in Australia the heat was making me feel crazy its a good month to be in now
February 19, 2017, 07:55:44 am Romans 8 says: The month of February just FLIES BY, doesn't it? It being a < 30 day month helps too! (Unusually warm this month too!)
January 24, 2017, 09:38:51 pm Romans 8 says:
January 16, 2017, 07:17:24 pm Romans 8 says:
October 24, 2016, 03:38:23 am Christian40 says: i'm here again i get bonus time on the Net today Smiley
View Shout History
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: first Gays, now polygamy! upnext? Chickens!!!  (Read 2703 times)
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #90 on: July 05, 2015, 03:47:20 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #91 on: July 06, 2015, 01:12:43 pm »

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsmax-Tv/Tom-DeLay-Justice-Department-perversions/2015/06/30/id/652929/
Tom DeLay: Justice Dept. Wants to Legalize 12 'Perversions'
6/30/15

Former U.S. House Majority Leader Tom DeLay claims the Justice Department has drafted a memo that spells out a dozen "perversions," including bestiality and pedophilia, that it wants legalized.

"We've … found a secret memo coming out of the Justice Department. They're now going to go after 12 new perversions. Things like bestiality, polygamy, having sex with little boys and making that legal," DeLay said Tuesday on "The Steve Malzberg Show" on Newsmax TV.

"Not only that, but they have a whole list of strategies to go after the churches, the pastors and any businesses that try to assert their religious liberty. This is coming and it's coming like a tidal wave."

The Texas Republican's bombshell claim comes four days after the Supreme Court ruled that same-sex marriage is now legal in all 50 states — a landmark decision DeLay strongly opposes.

When Steve Malzberg repeated to DeLay his assertions that the Justice Department seeks "to legitimatize or legalize" practices such as bestiality — defined as sex acts between humans and animals — DeLay responded:

"That's correct, that's correct. They're coming down with 12 new perversions … LGBT [short for lesbian gay, bisexual and transgender] is only the beginning. They're going to start expanding it to the other perversions."
Special:
He did not list the other nine "perversions" he said are mentioned in the Justice Department's memo and did not share it with Newsmax TV.

DeLay, who represented the Lone Star State's 22nd District from 1985 to 2006 and was Republican Party House Majority Leader from 2003 to 2005, said that with the high court's ruling last Friday, "all hell is breaking loose."

Just right here in Texas our Attorney General Ken Paxton has written an attorney generals' opinion directing our county clerks that in issuing marriage licenses that they don't have to issue marriage licenses if it conflicts with their religious beliefs. That's just the beginning," DeLay said.

"In just the last few days all over this country, [people] letting their elected officials know that they are upset with us, that the Supreme Court is out of control, that we are in a constitutional crisis. We are really in a constitutional crisis."

"We have a president that totally disregards the Constitution, steps all over it. We have a Supreme Court that … [believes] the Constitution is a living document and whatever they say goes. And we have a Republican Congress that doesn't even understand the Constitution and the fact that they have the most power and can stand up and stop the other two branches. We're in serious trouble."
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #92 on: July 07, 2015, 07:04:12 am »

Why Two? The Question Gay Activists Cannot Answer

If marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, then why should it be limited to two people (or, for that matter, require two people)? Why can't it be one or three or five? What makes the number "two" so special if it doesn't refer to the union of a male and a female?

I have asked this question for years in various settings, from a campus debate with a professor to social media and from my radio show to writing, and I have not yet received a single cogent answer, since no cogent answer exists.

If "love is love" and "marriage equality" is the mantra, then why can't any combination of loving adults form a "marriage"?

How can anyone in support of same-sex "marriage" object to the goals of the Marriage Equality Blogspot which calls for "Full Marriage Equality," specifically, "for the right of consenting adults to share and enjoy love, sex, residence and marriage without limits on the gender, number or relation of participants"?

If you say, "But marriage has always been the union of two people," that is patently false, since polygamy has existed for millennia (and still exists in scores of countries) and, more importantly, throughout history, whatever number of people were involved, the fundamental requirement was not two people but a man and a woman.

If you say, "But polygamy is harmful to women and society," that is irrelevant, since if the people want to enter into marriage love each other (remember, love is love, right?), they should be allowed to.

Plus, polygamists have the ability to reproduce naturally and then join the children to their mother and father, which homosexual unions cannot do. And, speaking of harm, gay relationships are, statistically speaking, less stable than heterosexual relationships, while specific acts of homosexual sex, especially among males, have increased health risks.

Do gay activists really want to press the "harm" angle when it comes to polygamy?

As I wrote back in 2011, "It's a very short leap from polyamory to polygamy, and just as TV shows like Will & Grace helped pave the way for a more gay-affirming society, shows like Big Love and Sister Wives are helping to pave the way for a more polygamy-affirming society.

"Not surprisingly, in Canada, where same-sex marriage is legal throughout the country, Monique Pongracic-Speier, an advocate with the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, has argued on behalf of polygamists that 'consenting adults have the right—the Charter-protected right—to form the families that they want to form.' If homosexuals can, why can't polygamists?

"The logic really is quite strong: If someone has the 'right to marry the person they love,' as gay activists incessantly tell us, why shouldn't people have the right to marry multiple loving partners?"

That's why it's no surprise that the same day that the Supreme Court ruled to redefine marriage, Politico ran a story titled, "It's Time to Legalize Polygamy: Why group marriage is the next horizon of social liberalism."

And that's why it's no surprise that, within a week of the Supreme Court decision, the Internet was buzzing with reports that "a Montana man said Wednesday that he was inspired by last week's U.S. Supreme Court decision legalizing gay marriage to apply for a marriage license so that he can legally wed his second wife."

As Nathan Collier, the man in question remarked: "It's about marriage equality. You can't have this without polygamy."

Ironically, gay "marriage" advocates like Jonathan Rauch fail to see the irony of their position when they argue that "Polygamy Isn't the Next Gay Marriage," since their redefinition of marriage is far more radical than that of the polygamists.

A man and a woman are physically and biologically designed for each other, carrying within themselves the unique components of sperm and egg (the fact remains that there's no such thing as a baby without a male and female involved), and so the two must come together as one to form a marriage.

The man and woman also share a unique complementary emotionally and spiritually—have you ever heard the saying that "Men are from Mars and women from Venus"?—which is why the union of a man and woman is special, distinctive and even sacred. And that's why the union of man and a woman has been recognized as "marriage" throughout the ages.

As cultural analyst Robert Knight remarked, "The term 'marriage' refers specifically to the joining of two people of the opposite sex. When that is lost, 'marriage' becomes meaningless. You can no more leave an entire sex out of marriage and call it 'marriage' than you can leave chocolate out of a 'chocolate brownie' recipe. It becomes something else."

And when it becomes "something else" it can become virtually "anything else," which is why polyamorists (along with polygamists) are also clamoring for their relationships to be legally recognized. As U.S. News and World Report noted just three days after the Supreme Court ruling, "Polyamorous Rights Advocates See Marriage Equality Coming for Them."

That's why Eric Abetz, a senior government minister in Australia, recently warned, "If you undo the definition you then open up a Pandora's box, and if you say that it is no longer an institution between one man and one woman, you then do open up a Pandora's box."

To repeat, if your mantras are "Love is love" and "I have the right to marry the one I love," and if you really advocate "marriage equality," then why can't any number and combination of consenting adults join together in "marriage"?

If you say, "But that's not marriage," you have just shot yourself in the foot, since marriage has never been the union of any two people but rather the union of a man and a woman.

And so, just as surely as a male plug and a female plug are required to make a connection in the world of electronics, a male and female are required to have a proper marriage. Otherwise, it is not marriage, no matter what any panel of judges rules.

That's why the fourth principle in my book Outlasting the Gay Revolution is "Refuse to Redefine Marriage," since once you redefine it, you render it meaningless.

So, once again, I ask the question to advocates of "marriage equality": Why two? If marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, then why should it be limited to two people (or, for that matter, require two people)?

I'm not holding my breath.

http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/in-the-line-of-fire/50394-why-two-the-question-gay-activists-cannot-answer
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #93 on: August 13, 2015, 05:33:07 am »

Should Humans be Able to Marry Robots?

 Slate magazine is making headlines today with a headline of its own: "Humans should be able to marry robots."  The writer takes "marriage equality" to what he considers to be its logical conclusion.  Politico recently published an essay titled, "It's Time to Legalize Polygamy."  New York Magazine carried a long, sympathetic essay on "zoophilia," in this case a man who has sexual relations with horses.
 
Welcome to the brave new world of non-moral, non-religious, secular correctness.
 
If you look over the school calendar for Montgomery County, Maryland, you'll quickly discover that there's no Christmas.  Or Easter.  Or Yom Kippur, or Rosh Hashanah. Schools are closed for the days coinciding with these religious holidays, but not because the district observes them.  Rather, classes are closed because the district expects a high level of student and staff absenteeism on those days.  That way, Montgomery County Public Schools can remain decidedly non-religious, despite the decidedly religious convictions of many of their constituents (For more, read Nick Pitts's Should Schools be closed for Christian Holidays?).
 
Episcopal rector Andrew Petiprin: "We have slid down the slippery slope, hurried away from a biblical vision of right-ordered humanity, and our culture now consists of work with no intrinsic end, mind-numbing entertainment, ubiquitous self-medication, the valorization of every sexual desire and identity under the sun, genetic manipulation, and industrial levels of abortion on demand with the harvesting of baby organs."
 
Perseverance is the order of the day.
 
In Jeremiah 25, the prophet told the nation, "For twenty-three years . . . the word of the Lord has come to me, and I have spoken persistently to you, but you have not listened" (Jeremiah 25:3).  Later, the Lord said of the same people, "They have turned to me their back and not their face.  And though I have taught them persistently, they have not listened to receive instruction" (Jeremiah 32:33).  But neither the prophet nor his Lord gave up.  They continued speaking truth to culture, until the people repented or faced divine judgment.
 
Here's the irony about persistence: it takes persistence to persist.  In dealing with spiritual opposition, the longer we obey God, the greater the resistance.  When we refuse Satan's first temptation, he escalates his attacks.  When we stand against cultural immorality, the culture stands against us.  The longer we trust God, the more we need to trust God, both for strength today and for results in eternity. (Tweet this)
 
Henri Nouwen: "We belong to a generation that wants to see the results of our work.  We want to be productive and see with our own eyes what we have made.  But that is not the way of God's Kingdom.  Often our witness for God does not lead to tangible results.  Jesus himself died as a failure on a cross.  There was no success there to be proud of.  Still, the fruitfulness of Jesus' life is beyond any human measure.  As faithful witnesses of Jesus we have to trust that our lives too will be fruitful, even though we cannot see their fruit.  The fruit of our lives may be visible only to those who live after us.
 
"What is important is how well we love.  God will make our love fruitful, whether we see that fruitfulness or not."
 
So let's love people enough to tell them the truth with grace.  And let's ask God for the persistence to persist.  Where do you need spiritual stamina today?

http://www.christianheadlines.com/columnists/denison-forum/should-humans-be-able-to-marry-robots.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #94 on: August 13, 2015, 08:33:51 am »

Now they're putting out Hellywood products(movies and tv shows) where they show robots are intermingling in mainstream society like normal people, albeit with dire consequences.

My dad is a computer science professor, and even he is very concerned about this too(as he keeps up with this stuff).
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #95 on: August 30, 2015, 06:44:27 am »

Polygamists Point to ‘Gay Marriage’ in Fight Against Utah’s Appeal of Polygamy Ruling

An attorney representing a polygamist at the center of the TLC reality show “Sister Wives” is pointing to the recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex “marriage” in his fight against Utah’s appeal of a federal decision striking down the state’s ban on polygamous cohabitation.

“From the rejection of morality legislation in Lawrence to the expansion of the protections of liberty interests in Obergefell, it is clear that states can no longer use criminal codes to coerce or punish those who choose to live in consensual but unpopular unions,” attorney Jonathan Turley wrote on behalf of plaintiff Kody Brown.

“This case is about criminalization of consensual relations and there are 21st century cases rather than 19th century cases that control,” he said.

“Homosexuals and polygamists do have a common interest: the right to be left alone as consenting adults,” Turley also told reporters in 2011. “There is no spectrum of private consensual relations—there is just a right of privacy that protects all people so long as they do not harm others.”

As previously reported, Brown of the TLC reality show Sister Wives, along with his four “wives,” Meri, Janelle, Christine and Robyn, filed suit in 2011 to challenge parts of the law that they claimed violated their privacy rights.

The five had been under investigation by state officials for violating the statute, and moved to Nevada to escape punishment. Brown is married to one of the women, and considers his relationship with the other three women as being “spiritual unions.” He has fathered 17 children with his four lovers.

While all states prohibit bigamy–entering into multiple marriages–Utah also bans residents from living together in a polygamous relationship. Brown, a member of the Apostolic United Brethren Church, a fundamentalist Mormon sect, contended that such a prohibition violates his freedom of religion.

    Connect with Christian News

In December 2013, Judge Clark Waddoups, nominated to the bench by then-president George W. Bush, sided with Brown in determining that Utah’s prohibition on polygamist cohabitation violated the First and Fourteenth Amendments, and interfered with the right to privacy. He pointed to the 2003 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, which decriminalized sodomy in the nation, and differentiated unmarried sexual conduct from criminal bigamy.

“Consensual sexual privacy is the touchstone of the rational basis review analysis in this case, as in Lawrence,” he wrote. “The court believes that Plaintiffs are correct in their argument that, in prohibiting cohabitation under the statute, ‘it is, of course, the state that has equated private sexual conduct with marriage.’”

Therefore, because Brown does not claim to be married to all of the women–nor does the state ban cohabitation in premarital or adulterous relationships—Waddoups threw out the cohabitation section of the statute, while upholding the prohibition on bigamy.

Last August, Waddoups issued his final ruling in the matter, striking the law and ordering the state to pay Brown’s attorney’s fees surrounding the lawsuit. Officials in Utah then appealed to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals in May, asserting that polygamous relationships are harmful to women and children.

“Utah has an interest in regulating marriage because it is an important social unit, and this interest remains as this court has recently recognized regardless of how other state provisions regulating marriage are evaluated for their constitutional soundness or infirmity,” Utah Solicitor Parker Douglas wrote in his brief.

But Brown and his attorney are contending otherwise in their submission to the court this week.

“By only striking the cohabitation provision, the district court left Utah with the same law maintained by most states in the Union prohibiting bigamy,” Turley wrote. “What was lost to the state is precisely what is denied to all states: the right to impose criminal morality codes on citizens, compelling them to live their lives in accordance with the religious or social values of the majority of citizens.”

http://christiannews.net/2015/08/28/polygamists-point-to-gay-marriage-in-fight-against-utahs-appeal-of-polygamy-ruling/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #96 on: October 18, 2015, 11:29:34 pm »

Homosexual Men ‘Divorce’ to Become Threesome, Now Plan to Use Sisters as Surrogates

could you get even more deviant?

Two homosexual men recently “divorced” under Canadian law so that they could include a third man in their relationship, and now plan to have their sisters serve as surrogates to bear their children.

“We just want to say that love is love. It should be multiplied not divided,” Adam Grant told the Daily Mail. “It shouldn’t matter if you’re in a three-way or a four-way relationship.”

Grant and his partner Shayne Curran met Sebastian Tran at a nightclub in 2012, after “tying the knot” the year prior. A year later, they agreed to be open to seeing others.

“Adam and I wanted to have a little more fun so we decided to experiment with multiple partners,” Curran stated. “We never intended it to be anything serious, we certainly never planning on taking on a full-time third partner by any means. It was just bit of sexual experimentation.”

When they met Tran, they both had feelings for him, so in discussing how they could include the man in their relationship, they decided to divorce in order to become a threesome.

While polygamy is not legal in Canada, the men state that they have attorneys that can work up paperwork declaring that the three are bound to each other “in the eyes of the law.”

“If anything, Sebastian only enhanced our relationship,” Curran said.

Now, in order to have children, the men state that their sisters have agreed to become surrogates. Some have also offered to donate their eggs.

“I have two sisters who have both offered to carry our children for us as surrogates and are willing to donate their eggs as well. My sisters actually argue over which one them will carry our baby first,” Curran stated. “Sebastian’s sister will probably donate her eggs too so we can keep it in the family. We want to mix our genes enough so that our kids are as genetically close to us as possible.”

As previously reported, earlier this year, photos of three Thailand men who symbolically “married” each other went viral, garnering societal support for the concept of same-sex “throuples” worldwide, but also generating remarks from Christians about the confirmation of the slippery slope that has long been predicted.

“Love occurs unconditionally and is not limited to only two people,” one of the men, only identified as Art, wrote on Facebook. “Love brings peace to the world.”

Following the report, Dr. Michael Brown noted that the situation demonstrates how mankind has made up its own rules along the way in an attempt to legitimize and justify what a particular person wants. Since homosexuals have stated that marriage should be defined as the union of two people who have feelings for each other, regardless of gender, where does the rule about two people come from?

“If a gay activist says, ‘But marriage is the loving, long-term commitment of two people,’ the answer is simple: ‘Says who? That’s just your new definition. Where did you get the idea it was two people if not from its historic, natural meaning?’” Brown explained. “And so, if I’m ‘bigoted’ because I don’t recognize same-sex ‘marriage,’ then gay activists (and their allies) are just as ‘bigoted’ if they don’t recognize three men (or women) ‘marrying.’

He stated that these developments are demonstrating the domino effect that results when the world rebels against God and His Master design for mankind.

“Those who have taken down the fence of marriage as God intended it have opened up a Pandora’s Box of possibilities,” Brown said, “none of them good.”

http://christiannews.net/2015/10/18/homosexual-men-divorce-to-become-threesome-now-plan-to-use-sisters-as-surrogates/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #97 on: October 26, 2015, 08:34:02 pm »

Wedded 'throuples' coming to America

Has the Supreme Court’s ruling that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry paved the way for all kinds of non-traditional relationships to be legally recognized?

“If marriage is not the union of a man and a woman, why limit it to two people?” asked Michael Brown, a national talk radio host and author of “Outlasting the Gay Revolution.” “What makes the number two unique or necessary? Why not marry yourself, as some women have recently done? Why not throuples? There are several examples of this in the last few years. Why not three women and two men? We see this already in polygamous relationships. Why not?”

Three “gay” men in Canada are asking that very question.

The three 20-something medical professionals live together in Nova Scotia as a threesome, and they now hope to start a family.

According to the London Daily Mail, Adam Grant and Shayne Curran got married in 2011. A year later they met Sebastian Tran in a nightclub and both fell for him. Grant and Curran then got divorced so they could let Tran into the fold as part of an equal, three-way relationship.

Polyamory is not legal in Canada, but the men claim they have lawyers who can draft paperwork to ensure all three are “equally bound and obligated to each other in the eyes of the law.”

Tran said getting married legally is important to his partners and him.

Paul Kengor, a university professor and author of “Takedown: From Communists to Progressives, How the Left Has Sabotaged Family and Marriage,” said these types of unions are inevitable once a nation redefines marriage to mean anything other than one man and one woman.

“Once the standard becomes that marriage can be defined in whichever way a people or culture desire, then marriage is redefinable, period,” Kengor told WND. “This is plainly inevitable. If liberals could get past emotion, and look at the sheer logic of what they’re asserting, then they’ll see that they’ve created the conditions for these types of new marriage configurations by smashing the standard of one-man-one-woman marriage.”

Carl Gallups, a pastor, talk radio host and author of the forthcoming book “Be Thou Prepared,” believes the U.S. soon may see odd configurations for marriage such as threesomes.

“This is exactly where we can expect the U.S. to go in the near future,” Gallups told WND. “Why would it not go in this direction? What is to stop it from doing so? There is no longer a ‘normality standard’ for marriage or domestic relationships – including the definition of family. In fact, I predict that U.S. conjugal relationship scenarios will eventually become even more bizarre than this example.”

For the “gay” Canadians, it does get more bizarre than a simple longing for marriage. Last week, the men told the Daily Mail they want to conceive three children using their own genetics. The plan is for Curran’s two sisters to carry the children and Tran’s sister to donate her eggs as well.

Brown, who writes a WND column, worries about any child that may be born into that kind of scenario.

“The worst thing of all is that a child could be brought into this relationship, robbed of his or her mother, subjected to a poor example of family structure, and living in a situation that has all the potential for real instability and guaranteed confusion,” he said.

Kengor said leftists now have their work cut out for them to stop a slide down a slippery slope, if they want to limit “gay” marriage to monogamous relationships.

“Liberals will now need to explain to threesomes like these how and by what standard they can be denied their ‘marriage rights’ and their ‘marriage equality,’” Kengor challenged. “Liberals need to explain to these three men and their would-be children why their love is not legitimate. Does ‘love win’ here or not? If not, then why?”

Gallups pointed out there may be a larger social agenda behind what the Canadian lovers are doing. As the Daily Mail reported, “The trio hope to show that polyamory is a perfectly acceptable choice of life and love.”

“Why should we be surprised by this?” Gallups asked rhetorically. “The radical gay agenda in the United States has admitted, long before the SCOTUS ruling, that nationwide gay marriage legalization was just the beginning of their greater plan. Their declared agenda has always been stated as a radical broadening of the definition of legalized domestic relationships as well as a direct targeting of the institutions they felt might be standing in their way, namely the Christian church, our nation’s Christian heritage, and the standard biblical message.”

Gallups noted the “standard biblical message” about marriage can be found in Matthew 19:4, straight from the lips of Jesus: “Have you not read, that in the beginning God made them male and female? For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and cleave unto his wife and the two will become one flesh.”

“Jesus’ declaration is irrefutable: The definition of a legitimate marriage (from the One who invented marriage) is one woman and one man – period,” Gallups said.

But the pastor believes too many people ignore the Word of God and choose to do what is right in their own eyes.

“Knowing what I know about the nature of people who deny the Word of God as the authority of their life, and what I know about the declarations of the Word of God itself, they will do whatever they can dream up – and whatever they can get away with,” Gallups warned. “Simply put, we have ‘been given over to a depraved mind,’ just as the Bible predicted (Romans 1:18-32).”

Gallups believes it is essential for the Christian church to speak up for traditional marriage and traditional families.

“While today’s church must always be ready to reach out with the gospel message and the love of Jesus Christ to all people who are struggling in any matter of sin, it must never relent from proclaiming the clear biblical truth of the eternally important matters of the very foundations of life and society: home, marriage and family,” Gallups said.

“Without these truths as the bedrock foundations of our culture, we will plunge into absolute madness.”

http://www.wnd.com/2015/10/gay-throuples-coming-to-america/print/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #98 on: October 27, 2015, 10:35:59 am »

Report Spam   Logged
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #99 on: November 30, 2015, 09:33:43 pm »

https://www.rt.com/news/323867-switzerland-horses-sex-attacks/
Sex abuse against horses on the rise in Switzerland
Published time: 29 Nov, 2015 11:39

Switzerland is seeing a worrying increase in the number of sex attacks carried out against animals and in particular horses. Figures showed cases of animal abuse rose to 1,709 in 2014, an increase of 1,542 from the previous 12 months.
The findings are worrying animal rights groups as it is a problem that seems to be getting worse. The foundation, known as Tier im Recht (Animals in Law), said the amount of abuse cases reported was triple compared to a decade ago.

However, it seems as though horses are coming under particular threat, with almost 10 percent of cases maltreatment of the animals involving bestiality.

“This rate is relatively elevated compared with other types of animals,” Andreas Ruttimann, a legal expert with Tier im Recht, told the Local.

“A total of 105 cases of animal cruelty to horses were registered last year, up considerably from previous years but probably below the actual number of incidents,” he added.

Worryingly, the group believes the actually figure could be much higher, given that around 150,000 people in Switzerland take part in equestrian activities. It also adds that there are more than 110,000 horses at 18,000 farms in the country.

The 20 Minuten newspaper reported that experts believe that as many as 10,000 people living in Switzerland are suspected of practicing zoophilia (sex with animals). Tier im Recht says the higher prosecution rates are down to tougher animal protection laws being introduced by the government, to protect their welfare.

Switzerland has a population of just over 8 million, meaning 0.125 percent of the population have a penchant for zoophilia.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #100 on: February 05, 2016, 06:12:36 pm »

Sologamy Rises as the Latest Marriage Perversion Trend

Timothy George highlights a revived trend in lifestyle choices in First Things, called "sologamy," which began over 20 years ago. George writes: "Sologamy is the marriage of someone to one's own self—the his- or herness of it is not relevant, although it seems to be mostly women who are doing it." Self marriage is not recognized in the U.S. or Europe, but nevertheless, more reports are surfacing of individuals marrying themselves.

The first person to marry herself to herself was Linda Baker in December 1993, George reports. Another is Sara Sharpe, "who wrote about her self-marriage in A Dress, A Ring, Promises to Self."

Last January, the Houston Chronicle reported that Yasmin Eleby "married herself at the Houston Museum of African American Culture ... in a lavish ceremony with 10 bridesmaids in attendance, plus family and other guests on hand to celebrate the event." Her ceremony was illegal, not recognized by the state or federal government as marriage. Her sister performed the "ceremony," and Yasmin went on a honeymoon with herself to "Cambodia, Laos, and a jazz festival in Dubai."

And CNN's Anderson Cooper interviewed a North Dakota woman, Nadine Schweigert, who married herself in front of her roughly 40 close friends. These were her vows:

"I, Nadine," she said to herself, "promise to enjoy inhabiting my own life and to relish a lifelong love affair with my beautiful self."

There was also, Dutch woman, Jennifer Hoes, who married herself. Aeon Magazine conveys her story in a ten-minute documentary, called, "Marrying Me."

And Jeff Dunetz of TheLidBlog.com highlights excerpts from Stylist Magazine, which describes the self-marriage of British Sophie Tanner. She married herself last year in a ceremony performed by her friend at a Unitarian Church who wore a rented bishop's costume, which also included 20 bridesmaids.

Of her day, Sophie said:

"I got married to myself; I was ridiculously happy and the vibe was amazing."

The Stylist reported:

"The sun shone brightly and all 20 bridesmaids showed up for a quick dance rehearsal and some bubbles. Then we picked up our sunflowers and processed through the Pavilion Gardens to the sound of whooping crowds. Kendrick Lamar's I Love Myself blasted over our portable speakers as we danced past the lawns.

"I'd hired my friend James a cardinal outfit and he was waiting for us at the Unitarian Church stage, looking resplendent in his red robes. My Dad gave me away in traditional style, then James delivered the ceremony with fantastic aplomb and more and more people gathered to see what was going on, gasping in fascination when they heard it was a self-wedding."

Vice Magazine also reports that Tanner remarked that "her love [for herself] grew after" after she married herself.

"(...) in the honeymoon period there was a change. I was more, 'You know what? We're going to have a night in together.' There was a sense of treating yourself and indulging. People ask if I want to get married and I can say, 'Actually, I'm already married to myself.' You don't have to worry any more. You're not waiting around for the one because you are the one. You've found that person."

George suggests this behavior is reflective of extreme narcissism embraced by an ever-increasing narcissistic culture:

"In some ways same-self marriage is the logical outgrowth of what cultural critic Christopher Lasch described in his 1979 bestseller The Culture of Narcissism. Lasch, building on Sigmund Freud's classic essay 'On Narcissism' of 1916, applied the term to the sense of grandiosity and excessive self-love that seem to mark not only psychologically disordered individuals but post-sixties American society as a whole."

While this is true, there's a much simpler answer that has existed for thousands of years. This lifestyle choice is indicative of the perversion explained in Romans 1 and Isaiah 5:20. We live in a time when people call:

"evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter" (Is. 5:20).

And the consequence of perverted behavior is perversion itself – because wickedness suppresses the truth. People who reject who God is and what he has made known are without excuse. As a result, God:

"gives them over in sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator – who is forever praised.

"Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion" (Rom. 1: 24-27).

God gave these women and others interested in self marriage over to their own "depraved minds." Their depravity is the result of their rejection of God and they "do what ought not to be done."

Lifestyle choices reflect more than an individual's personal choice.

They have eternal consequences.

In fact, such evil results in death. Being turned over to wickedness denotes a character marked by:

"envy, deceit, insolence, arrogance, boastfulness, invent[ing] ways of doing evil, [being] senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them" (Rom. 1:29-32).

Evil, exists not only in those who engage in it, but those who condone their practices. Affirming self-marriage is just as wrong as those who practice it.

http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/54869-sologamy-rises-as-the-latest-marriage-perversion-trend
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #101 on: April 07, 2016, 11:46:35 pm »


Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #102 on: April 11, 2016, 04:49:08 pm »




‘This Is Not Incest’: Colorado Man Leaves Wife for Sexual Relationship With Mother

An Colorado man who found his biological mother three years ago after being put up for adoption as a child has left his wife to marry his mother and have children together.

“This is not incest. It is [Genetic Sexual Attraction] GSA,” Kim West, 51, told the outlet New Day. “We are like peas in a pod and meant to be together.”

“I know people will say we’re disgusting, that we should be able to control our feelings, but when you’re hit by a love so consuming you are willing to give up everything for it, you have to fight for it,” she said.

West, who is from the U.K., had given her son Ben Ford, now 32, up for adoption 30 years ago. In 2013, Ford sent his mother a letter after locating her and the two decided to meet up after speaking on the phone for some time.

However, West found herself having feelings for her son, as well as dreams about him. Confused, she researched the matter and concluded that she had GSA.

Ford soon announced that he had stopped having feelings for his wife, Victoria, and told her that he was leaving her to be with his mother, who he allegedly referred to as “mummy girlfriend.” They admitted engaging in sexual relations on several occasions and met up with another twosome who also claim that they have GSA so as to find support for their lifestyle and counsel.

GSA is defined as “sexual attraction between close relatives, such as siblings or half-siblings, a parent and offspring, or first and second cousins, who first meet as adults.”

Ford and West now state that they are planning to marry and have children together. They remain unrepentant over their actions and were recently photographed for the cover of New Day, a national British newspaper.

“It’s a once in a lifetime chance and something Ben and I are not willing to walk away from,” West said defiantly.

As previously reported, a teenager in New Jersey announced last year that she planned to “marry” her biological father after the two met for the first time and had sexual relations following the admission of having feelings for each other.

“I didn’t regret it at all. I was happy for once in my life,” she stated. “We fell deeply in love.”

Some have spoken out against the slippery slope that occurs when God’s word is discarded for man’s opinion.

Last year, Dr. Michael Brown wrote in an article for Charisma News he was asked to participated in a debate surrounding whether consensual adult incest should be legalized. Brown recalled that he was the only one on the panel that said that such relationships are never okay in the eyes of God.

“All the other participants, including a professor and a psychoanalyst, advocated for removing the laws against consensual adult incest,” he stated. “Are you surprised? But what’s the problem? Love is love [according to society], right? As long it’s consensual, who can say no to love?”

Brown stated that these developments are demonstrating the domino effect that results when the world rebels against God and His Master design for mankind.

“Those who have taken down the fence of marriage as God intended it have opened up a Pandora’s Box of possibilities,” he said, “none of them good.”

Leviticus 18:6-7 reads, “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness: I am the Lord. The nakedness of thy father, or the nakedness of thy mother, shalt thou not uncover: she is thy mother; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.”

http://christiannews.net/2016/04/10/this-is-not-incest-colorado-man-leaves-wife-for-sexual-relationship-with-mother/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #103 on: April 11, 2016, 08:14:05 pm »

Disgusted by incest? Genetic Sexual Attraction is real and on the rise

Isn’t it disgusting? Isn’t it funny? The woman who fell in love with her son.

But laugh I did not, as I read the tale of Kim West – the 51-year-old who entered a romantic relationship with her child 30 years after giving him up for adoption.

Her story was splashed over the newspapers last week after she revealed how a reunion between the pair sparked an intense romance. Now they want to get married and start a family.



No one had their confetti ready though.
Across the internet, West and her toy boy lover were treated as circus freaks, called “sick on every level”. Some even demanded that West be sectioned and now it’s emerged they’ve gone into hiding fearing a jail sentence.

It’s interesting that the public was so outraged, because the couple’s story is far from unique. In fact, a number of family romances have emerged over the last decade – and I can’t see them stopping any time soon. There have been cases of grandparents settling down with grandchildren, fathers and daughters in love, and even twins twinned up.

What makes all these relationships tick isn’t love, or looks, or destiny, but – more likely – Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA). It’s the phenomenon no one wants to talk about - because it raises a taboo topic: incest.

ut it’s real – and with advances in fertility options, something we need to get our heads round. Fast.

GSA describes a powerful sexual attraction that occurs when biological relatives – parent and offspring, siblings or half siblings or first and second cousins – meet for the first time as adults. It was first identified in the 1980s by Barbara Gonyo, who fell madly in love with her son. After they reunited in adulthood, Gonyo struggled for 13 years to break off feelings for him.

That’s what GSA is: a struggle. When people criticise West, they overestimate her degree of control in the situation. Often GSA sufferers feel powerless – as if their feelings are impossible to change. There have been heartbreaking cases of families broken apart by GSA. It’s an affliction; a curse for all those involved.



Quite why GSA occurs is still up for discussion. There isn’t a great deal of research into the area, because who wants a PhD in incest? Some researchers have hypothesised, however, that an effect in infancy protects against GSA. When families live closely together, they become desensitised to each other as sexual prospects. This desensitisation effect is said to happen between birth and age six. Without it, and when relatives meet later in life, GSA can occur. Evidence from the Post-Adoption Centre and University College London suggests that GSA it happens in 50 percent of reunion cases.

Put in this context, West becomes far less of a freak and more of regularity. It is only her pride in her relationship that has perplexed others, as many GSA couples feel deeply upset about what’s happened to them. There are even communities online for them to anonymously discuss their relationships.

In the future, I hope they won’t have to hide away. I think that will be less likely as a result of increases in fertility options, which have dramatically upped the potential for GSA cases.

Perhaps one of the biggest causes for concern is egg and sperm donation. Over the last few decades, it has never been easier for organisations – and individuals - to dish out large quantities of eggs and sperm to different locations. The last Human Fertilisation & Embryology (HFEA) report shows that sperm donations, especially, have been rising since 2005 – with many coming from the US and Denmark.

This seed sprinkling will essentially mean lots of children go through life without ever knowing their biological father and/ or mother, and other important close relatives, in the time where the desensitisation effect should happen.



Should they never meet with their (unknown) biological family, then they will never put themselves at risk of GSA. But such reunions have become much easier – especially as new rules brought out by the HFEA mean that any child conceived on or after April 2005 can now seek information on their parents when they turn 16 years old. This will inevitably mean more children discovering their biological relatives in adulthood, with the potential for hundreds, if not thousands, of more GSA cases.

And when these individuals do find that they have suddenly fallen in love with Mummy, Daddy, or Cousin Jimmy, there will be very limited routes to help them. Just as there are for Kim West.

Instead of mocking this tale of motherly love (gone too far), I wish people though of West as an opportunity to consider GSA, and how we can prevent and treat it in the future. Those who succumb to GSA are not sickos, or freaks, but victims who desperately need help and understanding. Their feelings are not controllable, but with scientific research and support, we can give them some degree in control over this devastating affliction. And stop the cases we know are bound to come and keep coming.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/family/disgusted-by-incest-genetic-sexual-attraction-is-real-and-on-the/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #104 on: May 27, 2016, 06:52:49 pm »

The Next Wave: ‘Puppy Play’, ‘Ecosexuals’ And ‘Polyamory’

In an era when “anything goes”, some people are pushing the envelope to shocking new extremes.  At one time, most of the debate was about one or two of the “alternative lifestyles” that are out there, but now there are a multitude of rapidly growing “communities” that are into things that would have been unheard of in previous generations.  We have gotten to a point where a large portion of our young adults are completely rejecting traditional values regarding marriage and family, and they are seeking out other paths that they hope will lead them to the fulfillment that they crave.

Let’s talk about “puppy play” first.  There is a growing community of people in the western world that are absolutely obsessed with dressing up like cats or dogs and behaving just like them.

For some, being a “furry” is not about sex at all, but others do like to combine the two.  The following comes from the Daily Mail…

Furries are people who dress up in animal costumes and take on the persona of that animal.

Occasionally they engage in full-on sex in costume but more common is the bizarre practice of ‘yiffing’, a form of dry-humping.

Earlier this month nearly 3,000 people attended the annual Biggest Little Fur Con convention in Reno, Nevada, including around 700 people in fursuits.

Another alternative lifestyle that is starting to make some waves is called “ecosexuality”.  Here is how one source defines this movement…

According to Ecosexuality.org, where the movement appears to have originated online, an “eco-sexual” is defined as “someone who finds nature sensual, sexy.” Some ecosexuals engage in sex acts with things in nature, according to blog posts from the website.

Yes, I know that this sounds very weird.

But this is a real thing.  In fact, there are people that actually engage in “ecosexual performance art”, and down in Australia there is an entire ecosexual brothel…

WALKING into a sex chamber you would expect to see whips, chains and a pair of handcuffs.

But there is a temporary sex house in Melbourne that is nothing like you’d think.

As you venture deeper into the rooms you will find condoms that fit your fingers and surgical masks with grass sprouting from the mouth.

This is the sex house of an ecosexual, a person who makes the land their lover, bringing a whole new meaning to “environmentally friendly” and “****-ticulture”.

It would be easy to make lots of jokes about this sort of thing, but that is not the intention of this article.

Rather, the goal is to get people to understand just how radically our culture is shifting.  Huge segments of our society are completely discarding traditional notions of morality and are engaging in behaviors that our grandparents never even would have imagined.

Another example is the explosive growth of polyamory.  According to Google, polyamory “is the practice of, or desire for, intimate relationships involving more than two people, with the knowledge and consent of everyone involved”, and in a previous article I discussed how colleges and universities all over the United States are holding events and workshops to promote polyamory as “an acceptable lifestyle choice”.

And this is not just being discussed on the fringes of society.  For instance, the following comes from an article that was published in the Washington Post…

In a room full of pillows and erotic paintings, I found myself in the middle of a refreshingly honest conversation. “I don’t want to muscle through commitment,” one woman said as her partner rubbed her shoulder. “I want to wake up each day and decide for myself: Do I still want to be with this person? And know that he’s deciding for himself, too.”

The man rubbing her shoulder had other girlfriends. But here, his attention was laser-focused on her. He watched her with adoration, and I found myself feeling envious of that emotional attachment.

About 15 people sat in our circle — some came alone, others with partners. There was a transgender woman in a long black dress and dark makeup; a middle-aged couple in business attire, their legs crossed conservatively. There was a woman in her early 20s and some couples in their 60s. But each person in this wide spectrum listened and discussed their polyamorous lifestyle in similar terms. They all believed that love could be limitless, and that they deserved as much of it as they could find.

Of course the Obama administration is doing all that it can to promote “alternative lifestyles” these days.  To say that “things have changed” in the White House over the past couple of generations would be a massive understatement.

Just consider this parallel for a moment…

In May 1961, President John F. Kennedy announced that we would put men on the moon.

In May 2016, Barack Obama announced that we would put men in women’s restrooms.

And while most of the focus has been on the bathrooms, many people have not even considered some of the other very disturbing implications of Obama’s recent move…

The most offensive part of the new policy is that, under the Obama administration’s federal guidance:

School districts must allow biological males and females to spend the night together in the same hotel room on field trips;
Colleges must let men who say they are transgender be roommates with one or more women; and
School officials cannot even tell those young women or their parents in advance that their new roommate is a man, without risking a federal lawsuit.
The plain wording of the Obama administration’s diktat is clear enough, yet it has not been reported, even by conservative news outlets.

Needless to say, a lot of parents are going to feel compelled to pull their children out of public schools just based on these new “guidelines” alone.  But the truth is that our public schools have not been good environments for our children for a very long time.  Just consider what just happened down in Florida…

Florida sheriff’s detectives are investigating a cellphone video purportedly showing a 15-year-old girl having sex with as many as two dozen boys in a public high school bathroom after school.

A school security camera captured 25 boys entering the restroom on May 17, news media outlets reported.

Lee County Sheriff’s Office spokesman Tony Schall said Tuesday that authorities originally decided not to pursue any criminal charges from the incident.

I know that I threw a lot at you in this article, and I know that a lot of it was quite graphic.

The goal was not to shock you or to upset you.  In the end, we need to face the reality that we are not a “good” nation.  Evil is rising in literally thousands of different ways, and yet very few people are standing up for the truth.

How bad do things have to get in America before people will finally be willing to stand up and do something about it?

http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-next-wave-puppy-play-ecosexuals-and-polyamory
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #105 on: May 27, 2016, 08:13:13 pm »



Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #106 on: June 10, 2016, 09:58:12 am »

http://www.nowtheendbegins.com/canadas-highest-court-gives-green-light-legalizing-sex-acts-animals/

Canada’s Highest Court Gives Green Light To Legalizing Sex Acts With Animals

Animal rights activist Camille Labchuk agreed with Justice Abella. “As of today, Canadian law gives animal abusers license to use animals for their own sexual gratification,” she told the paper. “This is completely unacceptable, contrary to societal expectations, and cannot be allowed to continue.”

6/10/16

Canada’s highest court has just ruled that some sex acts between humans and animals are legal.

“Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. Defile not ye yourselves in any of these things: for in all these the nations are defiled which I cast out before you:” Leviticus 18:22-24 (KJV)

EDITOR’S NOTE: As a God-rejecting lost world continues it’s descent into spiritual darkness, prepare yourself to witness things you never thought you would see in  your lifetime. When you reject the Bible, you will accept anything else like men in dresses using the ladies room all the way down to sex with animals being protected by the courts.

In a quixotic ruling, the country’s high court ruled that a man who was on trial for raping and sexually exploiting his own daughters wasn’t guilty of “bestiality.” The man reportedly, “smeared peanut butter on the genitals of his victims and had the family dog lick it off while he videotaped the act.”

The convicted man took his case to the Canadian Supreme Court, demanding that the bestiality charge be nullified. In the end, the court agreed.As a result of the **** case, the court ruled 7 to 1 that humans having sexual contact with animals is OK if there is no “penetration” involved in the act.

In its ruling, the court decided that the legislature had not clearly defined the terms in the country’s bestiality laws and the way the statute is written should be read to only outlaw animal penetration, whether that penetration is animal to human or vice versa.

“Although bestiality was often subsumed in terms such as sodomy or buggery, penetration was the essence — ‘the defining act’ — of the offense,” the court’s ruling states as reported by The Independent.

The high court’s lone dissenter, though, said the ruling would mean open season for the sexual exploitation of animals.

“Acts with animals that have a sexual purpose are inherently exploitative whether or not penetration occurs,” Justice Rosalie Abella wrote in her dissent.


Animal rights activist Camille Labchuk agreed with Justice Abella. “As of today, Canadian law gives animal abusers license to use animals for their own sexual gratification,” she told the paper. “This is completely unacceptable, contrary to societal expectations, and cannot be allowed to continue.”

The question is a troublesome one here in the U.S. as well, dividing liberals and serving as a watchword to conservatives. Recently, for instance, animal rights activists in Ohio were rallying for the legislature to make it more explicit that sex between humans and animals is forbidden by state law.

In April, animal advocates were seen protesting at the state capital in Columbus to raise awareness that Ohio has no law outlawing sexual exploitation of animals after a 61-year-old man was arrested for committing sex acts with dogs.

Ohio is one of only eleven U.S. states that don’t have any bestiality laws on the books, advocates say.

The U.S. and Canada are no outliers in having a mixed record when dealing with bestiality. A recent article from the Daily Mail lamented the troubling new trend of “animal brothels” rising in Germany as many humans are claiming sex with animals is just another “lifestyle choice.” source
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #107 on: July 05, 2016, 09:43:13 pm »


Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #108 on: July 05, 2016, 10:01:36 pm »

1 Corinthians 5:1  It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife.

I hear all the time from these anti-repentance heretics how this man was saved - for one, the context of this passage in 1 Cor 5 is CHURCH DISCIPLINE (something we rarely see anymore). And two (Bryan D. pointed this out recently) - notice what it says in this verse - even the LOST GENTILE WORLD wasn't practicing this incest abomination during Paul's days. That says A LOT right there!

1 Corinthians 6:9  Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
1Co 6:10  Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.


Yes, this man eventually came to repentance, and was accepted back into fellowship in 2nd Cor 2:7-8. (but that's another topic) But nonetheless - ultimately, what did NOT exist during Paul's days in the lost Gentile world, is now running rampant in today's society. If these anti-repentance heretics still want to insist this man was saved, then they might as well admit that those who grew up in "church", and ended up being sodomites later in their lives, are saved as well.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #109 on: July 06, 2016, 12:15:49 pm »

Man who wants to marry computer sues Kim Davis

The “marry my computer” plaintiff who already has tried his stunt in at least two other states now has sued Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis, who was jailed by a federal judge without due process for refusing his order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, in violation of her faith.

Now Mark “Chris” Sevier is suing Davis for a license to marry his Mac.

“This lawsuit is frivolous,” said Mat Staver, chief counsel of Liberty Counsel, which defended Davis’ religious rights against a series of complaints from “gay” duos as well as the actions of Judge David Bunning.

Sevier also named Gov. Matt Bevin and Kentucky Attorney General Andy Beshear in his lawsuit.

Sevier says he is trying to prove “same-sex marriage” has the same “legitimacy as a human marrying an inanimate object,” Liberty Counsel reported.

“There is obviously no right for a man to marry a machine,” Staver said. “When you make gender irrelevant to a gender-based relationship, you open Pandora’s box and make a mockery out of marriage.”

The New York Daily News reported in May that a Florida judge denied a motion by Sevier to marry his “****-filled Apple computer.”

The report said Sevier stated in his motion that if “gay” couples “have the right to marry their object of sexual desire, even if they lack corresponding sexual parts, then I should have the right to marry my preferred sexual object.”

Judge Robert Hinkle speculated the motion was satirical or “removed from reality,” and he dismissed the case.

Sevier also has tried out his claim, without success so far, in Texas.

The Daily News reported the Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility in 2011 said the “troubled Mac lover,” although he earned a law degree from Vanderbilt, was barred from practicing law for a “mental infirmity or illness.”

He also reportedly was arrested in Nashville for stalking country music star John Rich, according to The Tennessean newspaper.

At the Above the Law blog, a report said Sevier also targeted Utah with his claim.

Davis most recently has asked the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to vacate Bunning’s orders and drop the issue, since the Kentucky Legislature approved a law granting her request to remove her name and identification from marriage licenses.

That accommodation was what she originally had requested from Bunning.

The motion submitted on her behalf by Liberty Counsel argues that on July 14 – only two weeks before the case is scheduled for oral argument – Kentucky Senate Bill 216 will take effect, “modifying Kentucky law regarding the issuance and authorization of marriage licenses and, as a result, moot Davis’ consolidated appeals.”

The bill “modifies the Kentucky marriage licensing scheme to remove entirely a county clerk’s name, personal identifiers, and authorization from any license, thereby providing through a change in the law the very religious accommodation Davis sought from the beginning of this litigation.”

The motion called the bill, passed unanimously by the Kentucky Legislature and signed by Gov. Bevin, “an exercise of appropriate and responsible lawmaking.”

“It also renders Davis’ appeals from the district court’s orders moot and therefore deprives this court of appellate jurisdiction over her appeals.”

The filing said the court, in dismissing the appeals, “should also follow its normal course of vacating the district court’s orders on appeal.”

Previous court filings pointed out that Bunning ignored protections for Davis, the clerk in Rowan County, in both the state and the federal Religious Freedom Restoration Act in his activism for “gay marriage.”

“The district court … never considered the federal RFRA as applied to its finding of contempt, and it never entered any subsequent order addressing Davis’ federal RFRA defense to contempt,” the court record reveals.

“The federal RFRA provides that ‘government shall not substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion even if the burden results from a rule of general applicability,’ except that ‘government may substantially burden a person’s exercise of religion only if it demonstrates that application of the burden to the person – (1) is in furtherance of a compelling governmental interest; and (2) is the least restrictive means of furthering that compelling government interest.'”

The case centers on the U.S. Supreme Court’s creation of same-sex marriage last summer. In Kentucky, county clerks issue licenses, and Davis decided to suspend issuing any marriage licenses, so all comers would be treated alike. She asked for the simple accommodation of removing her name and title from the marriage licenses, but then-Gov. Steve Beshear refused.

Then, despite the fact that licenses could be obtained in nearby counties, same-sex activists sued her.

“From the beginning, Kim Davis requested the very accommodation for her religious convictions that the Kentucky legislature passed and which Gov. Matt Bevin signed into law. The previous governor could have made the same accommodation but refused to do so. Instead, he was willing to violate deeply held religious convictions about marriage in order to press his ideological agenda. Now that Kim Davis obtained the accommodation she has always requested, we notified the court of appeals that the case has become moot and no further legal proceedings are needed. We are very pleased with this outcome,” said Staver.

An earlier filing explained Bunning even refused to allow Davis due process in the case.

Staver previously explained: “Our Founding Fathers believed in the right to follow one’s conscience so much that they protected religious liberty in the First Amendment. The first Americans traveled to this faraway land for the right to exercise their religion according to their own hearts, not government mandate. From the Mayflower Compact to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Obergefell, no court precedent or legislative mandate says that same-sex marriage must be held at every wedding venue, photographed by a specific photographer, celebrated by all bakers, or, in this case, licensed by a particular clerk. Then and still today, Americans enjoy the free exercise of religion and the freedom to follow Biblical principles in their personal and professional lives.”

When Bevin took office, he immediately took executive action to protect Davis and other county clerks. The bill means the order can’t be reversed by a future governor.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/man-who-wants-to-marry-computer-sues-kim-davis/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #110 on: July 27, 2016, 07:27:00 pm »

Kentucky Woman Sues Kim Davis for Denying License to ‘Marry’ Animal

A Kentucky woman has filed a lawsuit against county clerk Kim Davis after she was denied a license to “marry” an animal.

According to local television station WDRB-TV, Elizabeth Ording, 27, is additionally suing Gov. Matt Bevin and Attorney General Andy Beshear over the matter.

She asserted that a “marriage to an animal wouldn’t be that different than same-sex marriage,” the outlet writes. “Ording says the county attorney told her she could have a wedding, but the state wouldn’t recognize the marriage.”

The case, Ording v. Davis, et al, is docketed online and has been assigned to Judge Henry Wilhoit in the Eastern District Court of Kentucky.

Earlier this month, Mark “Chris” Sevier of Vanderbilt Law School filed a suit against Davis for being denied a license to “marry” his laptop computer. He has filed similar suits in Texas and Florida in an effort to show that same-sex nuptials is just as legitimate as tying the knot with an object.

“This lawsuit is frivolous,” Mat Staver, founder and chairman of Liberty Counsel, said in a statement. “There is obviously no right for a man to marry a machine. When you make gender irrelevant to a gender-based relationship you open Pandora’s box and make a mockery out of marriage.”

As previously reported, Davis had been in national headlines last year after she declined to issue same-sex “marriage” licenses as long as her name was on the documents. Davis, who attends a Oneness Apostolic Pentecostal assembly, said that she would do so if her name was removed from the licenses.

Her refusal soon went to court via a lawsuit led by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), and in September, U.S. District Judge David Bunning ordered that Davis issue the licenses despite her religious identity. As she continued to refuse to issue the licenses without the accommodation, Bunning ordered that Davis be placed behind bars until she was willing to comply. In the meantime, the judge arranged for a deputy clerk to sign the licenses in her absence.

Davis was released from the Carter County Jail five days later after her attorneys filed an appeal of the contempt order, and also because Bunning was satisfied that her deputy clerks were providing the licenses instead. He stipulated her release on the condition that she not interfere with her deputies.

By the end of the year, new Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin issued an executive order for the Department for Libraries and Archives to release new licenses that do not cite the county or the name of the county clerk. Months later, the state legislature passed a law altering the licenses similar to Bevin’s order.

Davis consequently discontinued her legal proceedings as her request for accommodation was considered to be accomplished.

http://christiannews.net/2016/07/27/kentucky-woman-sues-kim-davis-for-denying-license-to-marry-animal/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #111 on: July 28, 2016, 02:37:15 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #112 on: August 02, 2016, 09:16:58 am »

http://www.forbes.com/sites/anthonynitti/2016/08/01/irs-increases-marriage-penalty-unmarried-cohabitants-to-get-twice-the-mortgage-interest-deduction/
8/1/16
IRS Increases 'Marriage Penalty,' Unmarried Cohabitants To Get Twice The Mortgage Interest Deduction

There are a thousand good reasons to never get married: in-laws, divorce attorneys, and the inevitable ravages of age on one’s attractiveness come immediately to mind.

But there are also significant tax hits that come with getting hitched, or as they’ve collectively been coined, the “marriage penalty.” For example, the 28% tax bracket kicks in at $91,150 of income if you’re single, but at only $151,900 — an amount basic math tells you is less than double $91,150 — for married taxpayers. In addition, single taxpayers start to lose 3% of itemized deductions when adjusted gross income exceeds $258,250; married taxpayers, however, will lose itemized deductions once adjusted gross income exceeds only $309,900.

Late last week, the IRS exacerbated the marriage penalty by offering a very large reward for unmarried taxpayers who co-own a home: double the mortgage interest deduction available to married taxpayer.

In AOD 2016-02, the IRS acquiesced in the Ninth Circuit’s decision in Sophy v. Commissioner, in which the appeals court overturned a Tax Court decision and allowed a same-sex, unmarried, co-habiting couple to each deduct the mortgage interest on $1.1 million of acquisition and home equity debt. In reaching it’s conclusion, the Ninth Circuit determined that the mortgage interest limitation is meant to apply on a per-taxpayer, rather than a per-residence, basis. The AOD issued by the IRS confirms that the Service will follow this treatment.

Let’s take a look at what this means:

Mortgage Interest Deductions, In General

Section 163(h)(3) allows a deduction for qualified residence interest on up to $1,000,000 of acquisition indebtedness and $100,000 of home equity indebtedness. Should your mortgage balance (or balances, since the mortgage interest deduction is permitted on up to two homes) exceed the statutory limitations, the mortgage interest deduction is limited to the amount applicable to only $1,100,000 worth of debt.

Now assume for a moment that you and your non-spouse lifemate/bookie/Japanese body pillow go halfsies on your dream house, owning the home as joint tenants. And assume the total acquisition mortgage debt is $2,000,000 and the total home equity loan $200,000, making total debt $2,200,000, with each of you paying interest on only your $1,100,000 share of the debt.

Are each of you entitled to a full mortgage deduction — since you each paid interest on only $1,100,000 of debt, the maximum allowable under Section 163 — or is your mortgage deduction limited because the total debt on the house exceeds the $1,100,000 statutory limitation?

In 2012, the Tax Court concluded that the answer was the latter. In Sophy v. Commissioner, this issue was surprisingly addressed for the first time in the courts (it had previously been addressed with a similar conclusion in CCA 200911007), with the Tax Court holding that the $1,100,000 limitation must be applied on a per-residence basis.

Thus, in the above example, even though the joint tenants each paid mortgage interest on only the maximum allowable $1,100,000 of debt, each owner’s mortgage interest deduction would be limited under the holding in Sophy because the maximum amount of qualified residence debt on the house — regardless of the number of owners — is limited to $1,100,000. Assuming the joint tenants each paid $70,000 in interest, each owner’s limitation would be determined as follows:

$70,000 * $1,100,000 (statutory limitation)/$2,200,000 (total mortgage balance) = $35,000

Instead of each owner being entitled to a full $70,000 interest deduction, the Tax Court concluded that the mortgage interest deduction was limited for both because the total debt on the house exceeded the statutory limits. The court reached this conclusion after examining the structure of the statute and determining that the plain language required the applicable debt limitation to be applied on a per-residence basis:

Qualified residence interest is defined as “any interest which is paid or accrued during the taxable year on acquisition indebtedness with respect to any qualified residence of the taxpayer, or home equity indebtedness with respect to any qualified residence of the taxpayer.” Sec. 163(h)(3)(A)

The court then added, “The definitions of the terms ‘acquisition indebtedness’ and ‘home equity indebtedness’ establish that the indebtedness must be related to a qualified residence, and the repeated use of the phrases “with respect to a qualified residence” and “with respect to such residence” in the provisions discussed above focuses on the residence rather than the taxpayer.

Ninth Circuit Reverses

In an illustration of how multiple smart people can look at the same set of facts and reach a different conclusion, late last year the Ninth Circuit reversed the Tax Court’s holding, deciding instead that the $1,100,000 limitation on qualified debt is determined on a per-taxpayer, rather than a per-residence basis.

Key to the Ninth Circuit’s decision was the statute’s treatment of married taxpayers who file separate returns for purposes of deducting mortgage interest. Section 163(h)(3) provides that “in the case of” a married taxpayer who files a separate return, the $1,000,000 limit on qualified residence interest and $100,000 of home equity interest are reduced to $500,000 and $50,000 respectively. The Ninth Circuit placed great emphasis on the use of the phrase “in the case of,” noting that it suggests an exception to the general limitations, and that aside from that specific exception, married taxpayers filing separately should be treated identically to married taxpayers under Section 163.

The statute gives each separately filing spouse a separate debt limit of $550,000 so that, together, the two spouses are effectively entitled to a $1.1 million debt, the same amount allowed for single taxpayers. Thus, the point of the language was to treat two married taxpayers who file separately the same as married taxpayers or a single taxpayer, which indicates that the limitations are to be applied on a per-taxpayer, rather than a per-residence basis.

Lastly, the court reasoned that if the limitation is to be applied on a per-residence basis, there would be no need to impose a 1/2 limitation on married couples filing separately. If the limit were indeed intended to be $1,100,000 per house, then married couples who live together but file separately would be forced to split the limit; there would be no need to add additional language to the statute to accomplish that result. If the $1,100,000 limitation is to be applied on a per-taxpayer, basis, however, the limiting language would serve a purpose, as it would prevent a married couple who files separately from deducting interest on a total of $2,200,000 and get twice the benefit of a married couple who files jointly.

Impact

The impact of Sophy and the Service’s subsequent acquiescence are a bit muted in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Windsor and its 2015 ruling in Obergfell, which together represent a seismic shift in the treatment of same-sex couples for federal tax purposes. Going forward, same-sex couples who are legally married under state law will no longer be forced to file as unmarried taxpayers; rather, any couple that is married under state law, same-sex or otherwise, will only be permitted to file married filing jointly or married filing separately. In other words: same-sex couples — welcome to the marriage penalty!!

Cohabitation, of course, is not limited to same-sex couples, and so the Service’s decision to allow each taxpayer who co-owns a house to claim an interest deduction on the full $1,100,000 of debt — provided they are not married filing separately — should be a welcome one for many.
Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #113 on: August 09, 2016, 12:08:19 pm »

Mother, 36, and son, 19, say they'll do anything to defend their love

    Monica Mares, 36, and her son Caleb Peterson, 19, of Clovis, New Mexico, face up to 18 months in prison if found guilty of incest
    The couple said that they are willing to risk everything to be together
    They have decided to go public with their affair in a bid to raise awareness of Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSA) relationships
    Mares, a mother of nine, gave birth to Peterson when she was 16 years old, and he was adopted shortly thereafter
    They were reunited for the first time last year after reconnecting over Facebook
    The couple, who live separately in Clovis, New Mexico, developed feelings for each other and their relationship became sexual a few weeks later
    But they are banned from having any contact with each other by the courts

rest: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3725551/Mother-36-son-19-fell-love-met-year-gave-adoption-baby-say-willing-risk-JAIL-defend-love.html
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #114 on: August 20, 2016, 04:43:14 am »

Muslims Demand Polygamy In Response To Same Sex Unions

Following the introduction of civil partnerships, Muslim representatives in Italy are now demanding the legalisation of polygamy.
Responding to a new law allowing same sex couples to enter civil unions, Hamza Piccardo argued that if gay relationships, which Muslims disagree with, are a civil right then Italians must accept polygamy as a civil right too.

The founder of the Union of Islamic Communities and Organisations (UCOII) in Italy took to Facebook to claim polygamy is a “civil right” and that Italy would benefit from the large number of Muslim births it would promote.

The UCOII president wrote: “When it comes to civil rights here, then polygamy is a civil right. Muslims do not agree with homosexual partnerships, and yet they have to accept a system that allows it. There is no reason why Italy should not accept polygamous marriages of consenting persons.”

The call for polygamy, from Italy’s largest Muslim umbrella group, was met with outrage by a number of politicians.

Debora Serracchiani, deputy chairman of the ruling Democratic Party (PD) said: “Centuries of fighting for women’s rights can not simply be brushed aside.”

“Polygamy has nothing to do with civil rights,” she added.

Paolo Grimoldi, an MEP for the anti mass migration Northern League, declared: “This is the moderate Islam, with which the Italian government intends to keep the dialogue open.”

Reflecting on the debate his Facebook post unleashed, Mr. Piccardo said: “A simple consideration of legal philosophy has sparked an uproar so grotesque as to be even funny.”

Doubling down on his earlier plea, the head of the Muslim Brotherhood-linked body insisted polygamy is a civil right and a matter of “equality of citizens before the law”.

The former European Muslim Network spokesman also suggested Italy needs foreign labour and that polygamy would boost the nation’s economy.

Mr. Piccardo commented: “Do not underestimate the demographic action of polygamy. It would rebalance population decline and the consequent need for foreign labour.”

Youth unemployment in Italy has averaged at 40 per cent over the past year.

The legal recognition of civil partnerships has been highly controversial in Italy with its deep Catholic roots. In October, a representative from influential billionaire George Soros’ Open Society Foundations attended an LGBT activist event in Rome.

The event, which lobbies the Synod of Bishops, was run by the newly formed Global Network of Rainbow Catholics. The network agitates against all Catholic scripture and Church decisions, language, and doctrine that it deems intolerant to homosexuals.

Open Society programme officer Peter Matjasic attended because, the foundation’s European communications officer said, it aligned with its mission to “promote equality and combat discrimination of minority groups”.

Soros’ foundation, which spent $827 million globally in 2014, has been very active in advancing gay marriage across Europe. Mr. Matjasic is particularly involved in this cause, his most recent Tweet praising an entire summer school in Ireland devoted to promoting same sex marriage.

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2016/08/09/civil-union-muslims-demand-polygamy/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Romans 8
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Posts: 27177


View Profile
« Reply #115 on: August 31, 2016, 09:26:17 pm »

Report Spam   Logged
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #116 on: September 07, 2016, 09:43:52 pm »

Oklahoma mother, daughter arrested after alleged incestuous marriage

A mother and daughter from Oklahoma are accused of having an incestuous marriage.

Patricia Spann, 43, and Misty Spann, 25, were married in March 2016 in Comanche County, court records show.

Police say Patricia is Misty’s biological mother.

Investigators with the Department of Human Services discovered the illegal relationship in August while investigating the children who were inside the Spanns’ home.

Misty and her two brothers were raised by a grandparent when Patricia lost custody of them, an arrest affidavit states.

The DHS investigator told authorities that Patricia and Misty reunited two years ago.

Patricia told officials she didn’t think she was breaking any laws by marrying Misty because her name is no longer listed on her daughter’s birth certificate.

A warrant was issued for their arrests on Friday.

Since then, Patricia and Misty have both been arrested and booked into the Stephens County Jail for incest, a detective told KFOR.

Court records show this isn’t the first time Patricia has married one of her own children.

She also married one of her sons in 2008.

However, court records show that marriage was annulled in March 2010.

http://kfor.com/2016/09/07/oklahoma-mother-daughter-arrested-after-alleged-incestuous-marriage/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #117 on: September 12, 2016, 07:23:25 pm »

Next Up: Legalization of Incest, Necrophilia, Pedophilia, Zoophilia and More

By destroying the institution of marriage, the "gay rights" LBGQTI movement made possible the extension of similar "legal rights" for other "lifestyle choices," including zoophilia, consanguinamorous relationships, necrophilia, pedophilia, polygamy, and every other "fluid" sexual preference or identification—including sologamy and trans-polyamorous relationships. 

Efforts to normalize sex with animals as an accepted lifestyle choice resulted in one documentary winning an award this year that idolizes a sexual relationship between a man and his bottlenose dolphin lover.

The 40-year movement to legalize sexual interaction with children is working. People are publicly advocating without shame: "I'm a ****, but not a monster;" and, "pedophilia is natural and normal for males."

Now, incest activists in the consanguinamorous community argue it's their turn to have their sexual preference and lifestyle choice validated socially and legally.

Because of a case in New Mexico that's making national headlines, incest activists argue exactly what homosexuals argued to normalize incest.

"I was born this way."

"I can't choose who I love."

"I have a right to be happy just like everyone else."

"We aren't hurting anyone."

"Who is the government to legislate love?"

Incest activists maintain that all sexual preferences and acts should be legal if they are consensual and don't harm anyone. More importantly, the government should not be legislating love.

Christina Shy, an incest activist who runs an advocacy and support website for consanguinamorous people, and is in a relationship with her half-brother, argues that incest "needs to be brought to the attention of everybody in the country and people need to start thinking differently. It was the same with gay people just a few years ago and now they can get married they are accepted. Well why not consanguinamorous people like us? We are all adults. We are not pedophiles, there's no domestic issue. We are in love, we want to be together, but we are related. That shouldn't be a deciding factor."

She's right—if sex is consensual among adults in the privacy of their own home—how is it wrong or even illegal?

How is consensual sex between two adult men different than consensual sex between adult brothers and sisters or adult mothers and sons? If two adult men can legally marry each other, why can't consensual adult incestuous couples?

Why should one consensual relationship be denied and another legal?

Incestuous adults aren't coercing anyone. They are knowingly making choices about their own bodies, so why does anyone have a problem with it? It's really none of anyone else's business.

advertisement

If transgender people in America, who represent less than half of one percent of the population, can have the government dictate bathroom policies for non-transgender people in public schools and stores, why won't the government legalize consanguinamorous relationships?

Homosexuals, who represent less than 3 percent of the population in America, can legally marry and adopt children, why can't incestuous, polygamists, pedophiles and zoophiles?

If morality and laws are determined by personal preferences (that are fluid and always changing) to justify societal norms, why is a different standard being used to legislate incest, necrophilia or pedophilia than that of same-sex relationships?

Incestuous relationships are mutually consensual, therefore they should be legal. (The same reasoning can be applied to murder. Surely, if two people agree to murder someone, in fact a group of people consent to murder another group of people, their consent justifies their action, which should therefore legalize murder.)

The same goes for polygamy. And necrophilia.

Why is having sex with dead people wrong? The corpse doesn't care. It's dead. It doesn't hurt the corpse; it doesn't even know what's happening. Granted, it can't consent to the sexual act, but that doesn't matter because there are enough necrophiliacs to argue that their sexual preference is normal.

When it comes to not hurting anyone, incest activists argue that abortion is legal, so again, what standard is being used to legislate harm to another person?

They are right. If a baby has no constitutional rights, and adults do, why can't the adults, who aren't harming anyone else, be together?

Practicing homosexuality used to be illegal. Now gays can marry. Times have changed, so who has the audacity to suggest that incest is not the new normal of the 21st century family? Or bestiality?

"Non-human animals have incestuous relationships and multiple partners," some activists argue. Likewise, it's well-known that kings and queens had incestuous relationships for centuries to 'keep their bloodline pure.'

So, who is the government to legislate love? Everyone has the right to love whomever they choose. All love is equal. How is heterosexual love better than incestuous love or being in love with multiple partners?

As the defendant in the New Mexico case argues, as to why he should be allowed to love, have sex with and even marry his mother, he says: "This is about whether I have the right to love someone. And I sure (expletive) have the right to love Monica. You can't tell people who to love or who not to love."

His mother's name, Monica, could easily be "Matthew," the name of a brother, father, uncle or homosexual boyfriend.

No love is wrong.

Gay rights activists and corrupt politicians who chose to legalize same-sex marriage and transgender bathroom policies, have no justification to prevent the legalization other sexual behavior.

http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/59816-next-up-legalization-of-incest-necrophilia-pedophilia-zoophilia-and-more
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #118 on: September 12, 2016, 09:17:49 pm »

'Sister Wives' Appeal Polygamy Ruling to US Supreme Court

A polygamous family from TV’s Sister Wives has filed a request for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear their case for legalizing polygamy.

Kody Brown and his four wives submitted their petition Monday.

They want the high court to review an appeals court’s decision that upheld a unique provision of Utah’s polygamy law that bans cohabitation with other partners even if the man is legally married to just one woman.

The ruling overturned a 2013 legal victory for the Browns in which a lower court ruled the law violated polygamists’ right to privacy and religious freedom.

Like most polygamous families, Brown is legally married to one wife and “spiritually married” to the others.

The Browns, who now live in Las Vegas, face long odds. The U.S. Supreme Court has heard no more than 1 percent of the 7,500-plus cases appealed annually.

https://stream.org/sister-wives-appeal-polygamy-ruling-us-supreme-court/
Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Mark
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 20789



View Profile
« Reply #119 on: September 14, 2016, 10:14:25 pm »

INCEST IN AMERICA: THE NEXT TABOO TO FALL?
Mom, 45, arrested for having sex with son, 25

Police in Asheville, North Carolina, arrested a 45-year-old woman and charged her with having an illegal sexual relationship with her own 25-year-old son.

Melissa Nell Kitchens was accused of having a sexual relationship with her son, Shaun Thomas Pfeiffer, Buncombe County police told the New York Daily News.

The pair face felony incest charges which bring a maximum sentence of three years in jail.

Pfeiffer is also reportedly facing additional charges of taking indecent liberties with a child as well as communicating threats and drunk and disorderly conduct. He is being held on a $70,500 bond.

The man is also married and the father of a toddler. It is not known if the child-abuse charges are in connection with his child.

Pfeiffer’s mother, “Missy” Kitchens, recently gave a hint of possible turmoil with her son with a Facebook posting saying she “respected” whatever decision he makes regarding their relationship.

Kitchens is being held on a $30,000 bond.

It’s not the only recent incest charge.

In New Mexico, Monica Mares recently rediscovered the son she put up for adoption 19 years ago, but instead of rekindling a typical mother-son relationship, she allegedly initiated a sexual relationship. The pair face up to 18 months in prison if convicted and have courts dates later this month.

In Oklahoma, investigators arrested Patricia Spann, 43, and Misty Spann, 25, mother and daughter. The pair were married in March 2016, court records show.

Misty and her brothers were raised by their grandparents and was reunited with her biological mother two years ago. According to Patricia Spann, the pair “hit it off” and got married. In 2008 she married one of her sons. That marriage was annulled in 2010.


Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2016/09/incest-in-america-the-next-taboo-to-fall/#oeGdrviI5il86JUb.99

Report Spam   Logged

What can you do for Jesus?  Learn what 1 person can accomplish.

The Man from George Street
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkjMvPhLrn8
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
Free SMF Hosting - Create your own Forum

Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines