September 3, 2015 by CH
This is sickening. Here we are, 2015 USA, and principled religious objectors are being tossed into jail over refusing to sanction deviance. The American Pilgrims escaped religious persecution to settle a new land and spark the creation of a great and free nation.
The irony is too rich for words.
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
 | war-damned on Memetic Perfection |
 | Pretty Boy Looch on Generation Anhedonia |
 | Alex the Goon on What Makes A MAGA Man? |
| Alex the Goon on What Makes A MAGA Man? |
 | Jaded Jurist on Generation Anhedonia |
 | Danindc on What Makes A MAGA Man? |
 | Double E on Generation Anhedonia |
 | Doktor Jeep on Generation Anhedonia |
 | plumpjack on Generation Anhedonia |
 | Declane on Generation Anhedonia |
Christianity sowed the seeds for its own destruction with all that stuff about not judging and everyone being equal before Christ. Tolerance always seems to hold the door open for the intolerant to take over. Fatal flaw in Libertarianism, too.
Don’t worry, though. The Muslim ‘refugees’ will put a stop to this degeneracy in a few decades.
LikeLike
lzozozozolz
lzlozozolzoz
LikeLike
lzlozllzo
zlzozoozzolz
LikeLike
lzlozlzlozo
lzozozollzolz
LikeLike
Benjamin Rush
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; SURGEON GENERAL OF THE CONTINENTAL ARMY; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; “FATHER OF AMERICAN MEDICINE”; TREASURER OF THE U. S. MINT; “FATHER OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION”
The Gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rules for just conduct in every situation of life. Happy they who are enabled to obey them in all situations! . . . My only hope of salvation is in the infinite tran¬scendent love of God manifested to the world by the death of His Son upon the Cross. Noth¬ing but His blood will wash away my sins [Acts 22:16]. I rely exclusively upon it. Come, Lord Jesus! Come quickly! [Revelation 22:20]97
I do not believe that the Constitution was the offspring of inspiration, but I am as satisfied that it is as much the work of a Divine Providence as any of the miracles recorded in the Old and New Testament.98
By renouncing the Bible, philosophers swing from their moorings upon all moral subjects… It is the only correct map of the human heart that ever has been published.99
[T]he greatest discoveries in science have been made by Christian philosophers and . . . there is the most knowledge in those countries where there is the most Christianity.100
[T]he only means of establishing and perpetuating our republican forms of government is the universal education of our youth in the principles of Christianity by means of the Bible.101
The great enemy of the salvation of man, in my opinion, never invented a more effective means of limiting Christianity from the world than by persuading mankind that it was improper to read the Bible at schools.102
[C]hristianity is the only true and perfect religion; and… in proportion as mankind adopt its principles and obey its precepts, they will be wise and happy.103
The Bible contains more knowledge necessary to man in his present state than any other book in the world.104
The Bible, when not read in schools, is seldom read in any subsequent period of life… [T]he Bible… should be read in our schools in preference to all other books because it contains the greatest portion of that kind of knowledge which is calculated to produce private and public happiness.105
Roger Sherman
LikeLike
I first heard about the Illuminati from my J-wish roommmate in college. I laughed at him then too. Now I wish I could meet him again and trade notes. So take that David Pakman.
LikeLike
Secular zzzus in the West have low birth rates and very high rates of inter-marriage (another form of extinction), I guess they are as much against themselves as against “white “people.”
“Lack of self consciousness” is a better explanation.
LikeLike
GBFM is on point, but this is no lzozlzoozlzozol matter any more.
This woman is a victim of official government-sanctioned battery and false imprisonment.
They could begin whatever proceedings are appropriate to fire her, I guess (I have no idea if she’s elected there).
Arresting her and putting her in jail is pure communist dictatorship crackdown, folks.
LikeLike
http://www.mmisi.org/ir/39_01_2/kurth.pdf
LikeLike
hey herartssteitsstee!!!! HEATRISTSTES!!!
great nesws!
da gbfm is finally featured in a gallery on a wallll!!!!
my portrait had to be shrunk and cropped to fit zlzoozozozolz
LikeLike
Zzz have low birth rates and high rates of out-marriage. Another from of identity extinction.
LikeLike
American zzoz have had low birth rates and high rates of out-marriage; which is another way to extinct an identity, for several generations now.
Discuss.
LikeLike
There are not many women named “Candy”.
If I die tommorrow; no complaints…
LikeLike
Horn rimmed glasses.
LikeLike
lzozozolol
lzozozloolz
LikeLike
Thomas Jefferson
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; DIPLOMAT; GOVERNOR OF VIRGINIA; SECRETARY OF STATE; THIRD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
The doctrines of Jesus are simple, and tend all to the happiness of man.63
The practice of morality being necessary for the well being of society, He [God] has taken care to impress its precepts so indelibly on our hearts that they shall not be effaced by the subtleties of our brain. We all agree in the obligation of the moral principles of Jesus and nowhere will they be found delivered in greater purity than in His discourses.64
I am a Christian in the only sense in which He wished anyone to be: sincerely attached to His doctrines in preference to all others.65
I am a real Christian – that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus Christ.66
LikeLike
That’s not a Deist, that’s a believer who doesn’t like church.
LikeLike
This needs to be printed today.
Jewish women such as this monster (the other one is Kagan) are 22% of our Supreme Court. Jewish women, by their own account, are only 1% of the population. But there are ZERO white male protestants on the United States Supreme Court.
Does everyone get it, yet?
The Obergefell decision was treason. The majority’s decision is indefensible at an unimaginable level. Every single lawyer who understands Anglo American and US Constitutional law (as it is supposed to be practiced) knows that.
SCALIA, with whom Justice THOMAS joins, dissenting.
I join THE CHIEF JUSTICE’s opinion in full. I write separately to call attention to this Court’s threat to American democracy.
The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements *2627 it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance. Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.
I
Until the courts put a stop to it, public debate over same-sex marriage displayed American democracy at its best. Individuals on both sides of the issue passionately, but respectfully, attempted to persuade their fellow citizens to accept their views. Americans considered the arguments and put the question to a vote. The electorates of 11 States, either directly or through their representatives, chose to expand the traditional definition of marriage. Many more decided not to.1 Win or lose, advocates for both sides continued pressing their cases, secure in the knowledge that an electoral loss can be negated by a later electoral win. That is exactly how our system of government is supposed to work.2
The Constitution places some constraints on self-rule—constraints adopted by the People themselves when they ratified the Constitution and its Amendments. Forbidden are laws “impairing the Obligation of Contracts,”3 denying “Full Faith and Credit” to the “public Acts” of other States,4 prohibiting the free exercise of religion,5 abridging the freedom of speech,6 infringing the right to keep and bear arms,7 authorizing unreasonable searches and seizures,8 and so forth. Aside from these limitations, those powers “reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”9 can be exercised as the States or the People desire. These cases ask us to decide whether the Fourteenth Amendment contains a limitation that requires the States to license and recognize marriages between two people of the same sex. Does it remove that issue from the political process?
Of course not. It would be surprising to find a prescription regarding marriage in the Federal Constitution since, as the author *2628 of today’s opinion reminded us only two years ago (in an opinion joined by the same Justices who join him today):
“[R]egulation of domestic relations is an area that has long been regarded as a virtually exclusive province of the States.”10
“[T]he Federal Government, through our history, has deferred to state-law policy decisions with respect to domestic relations.”11
But we need not speculate. When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as “due process of law” or “equal protection of the laws”—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.12 We have no basis for striking down a practice that is not expressly prohibited by the Fourteenth Amendment’s text, and that bears the endorsement of a long tradition of open, widespread, and unchallenged use dating back to the Amendment’s ratification. Since there is no doubt whatever that the People never decided to prohibit the limitation of marriage to opposite-sex couples, the public debate over same-sex marriage must be allowed to continue.
But the Court ends this debate, in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law. Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion is a candid and startling assertion: No matter what it was the People ratified, the Fourteenth Amendment protects those rights that the Judiciary, in its “reasoned judgment,” thinks the Fourteenth Amendment ought to protect.13 That is so because “[t]he generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions….”14 One would think that sentence would continue: “… and therefore they provided for a means by which the People could amend the Constitution,” or perhaps “… and therefore they left the creation of additional liberties, such as the freedom to marry someone of the same sex, to the People, through the never-ending process of legislation.”
But no. What logically follows, in the majority’s judge-empowering estimation, is: “and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning.”15 The “we,” needless to say, is the nine of us. “History and tradition guide and discipline [our] inquiry but do not set its outer boundaries.”16 Thus, rather than focusing on the People’s understanding of “liberty”—at the time of ratification or even today—the majority focuses on four “principles and traditions” that, in the majority’s view, prohibit States from defining marriage as an institution consisting of one man and one woman.17
*2629 This is a naked judicial claim to legislative—indeed, super-legislative—power; a claim fundamentally at odds with our system of government. Except as limited by a constitutional prohibition agreed to by the People, the States are free to adopt whatever laws they like, even those that offend the esteemed Justices’ “reasoned judgment.” A system of government that makes the People subordinate to a committee of nine unelected lawyers does not deserve to be called a democracy.
Judges are selected precisely for their skill as lawyers; whether they reflect the policy views of a particular constituency is not (or should not be) relevant. Not surprisingly then, the Federal Judiciary is hardly a cross-section of America. Take, for example, this Court, which consists of only nine men and women, all of them successful lawyers18 who studied at Harvard or Yale Law School. Four of the nine are natives of New York City. Eight of them grew up in east- and west-coast States. Only one hails from the vast expanse in-between. Not a single Southwesterner or even, to tell the truth, a genuine Westerner (California does not count). Not a single evangelical Christian (a group that comprises about one quarter of Americans19), or even a Protestant of any denomination.
The strikingly unrepresentative character of the body voting on today’s social upheaval would be irrelevant if they were functioning as judges, answering the legal question whether the American people had ever ratified a constitutional provision that was understood to proscribe the traditional definition of marriage. But of course the Justices in today’s majority are not voting on that basis; they say they are not. And to allow the policy question of same-sex marriage to be considered and resolved by a select, patrician, highly unrepresentative panel of nine is to violate a principle even more fundamental than no taxation without representation: no social transformation without representation.
II
But what really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch. The five Justices who compose today’s majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every State violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification and Massachusetts’ permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003.20 They have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a “fundamental right” overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else in the time since. They see what lesser legal minds—minds like Thomas Cooley, John Marshall Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Learned Hand, Louis Brandeis, William Howard Taft, Benjamin Cardozo, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly—could not.
They are certain that the People ratified the Fourteenth Amendment to bestow on them the power to remove questions from the democratic process when *2630 that is called for by their “reasoned judgment.” These Justices know that limiting marriage to one man and one woman is contrary to reason; they know that an institution as old as government itself, and accepted by every nation in history until 15 years ago,21 cannot possibly be supported by anything other than ignorance or bigotry. And they are willing to say that any citizen who does not agree with that, who adheres to what was, until 15 years ago, the unanimous judgment of all generations and all societies, stands against the Constitution.
The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic. It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances, even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the Court to do so.22 Of course the opinion’s showy profundities are often profoundly incoherent. “The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality.”23 (Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms? And if intimacy is, one would think Freedom of Intimacy is abridged rather than expanded by marriage. Ask the nearest hippie.
Expression, sure enough, is a freedom, but anyone in a long-lasting marriage will attest that that happy state constricts, rather than expands, what one can prudently say.) Rights, we are told, can “rise … from a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives define a liberty that remains urgent in our own era.”24 (Huh? How can a better informed understanding of how constitutional imperatives [whatever that means] define [whatever that means] an urgent liberty [never mind], give birth to a right?) And we are told that, “[i]n any particular case,” either the Equal Protection or Due Process Clause “may be thought to capture the essence of [a] right in a more accurate and comprehensive way,” than the other, “even as the two Clauses may converge in the identification and definition of the right.”25 (What say? What possible “essence” does substantive due process “capture” in an “accurate and comprehensive way”? It stands for nothing whatever, except those freedoms and entitlements that this Court really likes.
And the Equal Protection Clause, as employed today, identifies nothing except a difference in treatment that this Court really dislikes. Hardly a distillation of essence. If the opinion is correct that the two clauses “converge in the identification and definition of [a] right,” that is only because the majority’s likes and dislikes are predictably compatible.) I could go on. The world does not expect logic and precision in poetry or inspirational pop-philosophy; it demands them in the law. The stuff contained in today’s opinion has to diminish this Court’s reputation for clear thinking and sober analysis.
Hubris is sometimes defined as o’erweening pride; and pride, we know, goeth before a fall. The Judiciary is the “least dangerous” of the federal branches because it has “neither Force nor Will, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm” and the States, “even for the efficacy of its judgments.”26 With each decision of ours that takes from the People a question properly left to them—with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but on the “reasoned judgment” of a bare majority of this Court—we move one step closer to being reminded of our *impotence*.
Obergefell v. Hodges, 135 S. Ct. 2584, 2631 (2015).
LikeLike
He’s a Christian Deist.
LikeLike
Kim Davis calls you a moron from her jail cell.
LikeLike
James Madison
SIGNER OF THE CONSTITUTION; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; FRAMER OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECRETARY OF STATE; FOURTH PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
A watchful eye must be kept on ourselves lest, while we are building ideal monuments of renown and bliss here, we neglect to have our names enrolled in the Annals of Heaven.71
I have sometimes thought there could not be a stronger testimony in favor of religion or against temporal enjoyments, even the most rational and manly, than for men who occupy the most honorable and gainful departments and [who] are rising in reputation and wealth, publicly to declare their unsatisfactoriness by becoming fervent advocates in the cause of Christ; and I wish you may give in your evidence in this way.72
LikeLike
lzololzlzlzol
lzolzozozoz
LikeLike
I just watched it. Hard hitting, first rate.
LikeLike
It’s easy to forget that white women are the second-most-right-wing group of people defined by race and sex after white men.
LikeLike
Meh…. unless a white woman is producing white babies, she is not doing the primary thing she can do to preserve the race.
Without babies, more female white nationalists are just angling for beta orbiters.
LikeLike
It’s easy to forget that white women are the second-most-right-wing group of people defined by race and sex after white men.
You would not wish to be judged by my wife. If I felt a shred of mercy for you, I would try to prevent it for your sake.
LikeLike
Strapon2 chimes in again, trying to put a damper on all things related to White RealTalk.
LikeLike
If you want children, please plan in advance how you will raise them and what you will teach them. Choose a mother based on a common philosophy. You may have to take a chance and speak your mind like a man. A woman worth exploring will respond positively. For example, see the recent thread on how fourteen eighty eight was a great year for raising young women. It will make Libtard women melt like the Wicked Witch of the West in water.
LikeLike
‘Dreg Smelliot’,
Quit whoring for attention.
Didn’t you claim you were going to leave? Then again, no other blog will take you.
You want, as GBfM would say, lotsa cocksa in your buttocksa.
LikeLike
Are the photos of the white women prisoners in Israel with their arms handcuffed behind their back and gagged actual photos of prisoners, or models posing for that shot?
Serious question.
LikeLike
It will hit 50,000 views within the hour, and that’s the J-tube count. That’s viral for a WN production.
LikeLike
needs better production skills; presenters a bit too stiff; seems forced and inauthentic at times…
Producers should never do their own editing.
LikeLike
No, that’s how dumb fuck equalists interrupt the text through their lense of social justice. Classic case of being so indoctrinated that you don’t have the language/ thought patterns to see the plain clear truth.
The seminal parable of the talents of Matthew 25 makes it clear that humans are not at equal in abilities but are responsible for what they are given. Basically the exact opposite of everyone being equal in ability and earthly worth.
The equality talked about in the Christianity is that people’s individual eternal souls are equal and that you will be judged according to what you were given.
LikeLike
One of the very most important things about this blog and I dare say, Matt King, is the ability to hear these old arguments against immoral behavior that were commonplace 100 years ago but are now censored by ommission to the point people never knew they existed and are intellectually incapable of countering the left wing arguments or rather, groundless assertions, they are fed non stop.
LikeLike
Sometimes you have to throw over tables too.
LikeLike
To quote Nick Steves, it’s not a matter of doctrine, but about evolving memetic culture. The radical progressives running rampant in the West aren’t Christians, but their ideology grew out of Christian culture.
LikeLike
When you say “grew out of”, you’re playing the Cathedral game of putting Christianity in a poor light… because most people will read “grew out of” as “natural progression” and “served as the basis of”, when nothing could be further from the truth.
What Satan, with his Cathedral, has done, is put God in a poor light by usurping and corrupting Scripture… NOT because they respect it and moved it along to its natural evolution… but because the devil and his minions have a special skill of appearing as angels of light, when need be, to delude Mankind.
The devil can quote Scripture with the best of them, which is why Jesus and Michael did not bother to play his game and debate him… they simply dismissed him with a get-thee-behind-me and may-the-Lord-rebuke-you.
LikeLike
I enjoy when some discussion here focuses on our Lord and how the sacred text applies to our lives as men today, and our cultural decline. Thank you.
LikeLike
I don’t understand how people don’t get this. None of the Christians understood “don’t judge,” to mean “don’t form moral judgments or defend moral values.” Elsewhere, both Jesus and St. Paul uphold excommunication and teach that the State should punish immoral and criminal persons. Moral judgments are repeatedly made throughout the New Testament. The only thing Jesus’ words meant to Christians for almost 2000 years, was: “When it comes to your spiritual life, do not preoccupy yourself with the failings of others; fix yourself first.” When it came to maintaining basic standards of moral decency in a country or community, they upheld moral judgments and encouraged the idea that immoral and wicked persons be shunned and/or killed.
The modern mis-application of “don’t judge” is obviously a disingenuous ploy used by liberals *against* Christianity; not anything that (real) Christianity has itself ever believed or tolerated.
LikeLike
+1. Thank you…. good to know there are still a few out there who “get it”.
LikeLike
But sadly there is little “real Christianity” to be found, at least in Churches.
LikeLike
All successful radical ideologies in the west owe a debt to Christian messianism. They are Christianities without the Christ.
These literally demonic corruptions proclaim the ends of Christianity — because those ends are true: universalism, eschatology, self-sacrifice — but adopt a militant “by any means necessary” strategy that ultimately destroys them, under the pretense of “If you want to make an omelet, you have to break some eggs.”
Their false proclamation of true principles are used as the fig leaves to conceal their real ends, which are self-aggrandizement and power. The lies at the heart of their strategy ensnare many otherwise good but simple people, who rightly agree with the ends while closing their eyes to the means. Hence the wildly ignorant reinterpretation of Christianity through the lens of Leninism — the only understanding of Christianity these dweeby millennial edgelords know.
Christ is the way, the truth, and the life. He does not merely speak truth, he embodies it. The most effective lies are 99% truth. Yes, The Enemy knows this.
Matt
LikeLike
Pope Francis is an excellent example of the naif I’m talking about, who is theologically ignorant and seeks alliance with the pawns of evil because the liars told him they all ultimately want the same thing.
But we are enjoined to seek first the kingdom of God, and only after will “all these things be added unto you.” Those who get fixated on the “added” are puppets of the Father of Lies.
LikeLike
Well, one still needs to follow the law. She took an oath of office after all. It’s one thing to stand up for your beliefs, quite another to impose them on others. She could always resign.
[CH: yes, the law.
the law is an ass.]
LikeLike
“Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams
lzolzolzlzol
LikeLike
lzozzlzlo
John Adams
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; JUDGE; DIPLOMAT; ONE OF TWO SIGNERS OF THE BILL OF RIGHTS; SECOND PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES
The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.1
Without religion, this world would be something not fit to be mentioned in polite company: I mean hell.2
The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity.3
Suppose a nation in some distant region should take the Bible for their only law book and every member should regulate his conduct by the precepts there exhibited. . . . What a Eutopia – what a Paradise would this region be!4
I have examined all religions, and the result is that the Bible is the best book in the world.5
lzozozozozozo
LikeLike
lolzolzlzlzl
Samuel Adams
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; “FATHER OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION”; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; GOVERNOR OF MASSACHUSETTS
I . . . [rely] upon the merits of Jesus Christ for a pardon of all my sins.9
The name of the Lord (says the Scripture) is a strong tower; thither the righteous flee and are safe [Proverbs 18:10]. Let us secure His favor and He will lead us through the journey of this life and at length receive us to a better.10
I conceive we cannot better express ourselves than by humbly supplicating the Supreme Ruler of the world . . . that the confusions that are and have been among the nations may be overruled by the promoting and speedily bringing in the holy and happy period when the kingdoms of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ may be everywhere established, and the people willingly bow to the scepter of Him who is the Prince of Peace.11
He also called on the State of Massachusetts to pray that . . .
the peaceful and glorious reign of our Divine Redeemer may be known and enjoyed throughout the whole family of mankind.12
we may with one heart and voice humbly implore His gracious and free pardon through Jesus Christ, supplicating His Divine aid . . . [and] above all to cause the religion of Jesus Christ, in its true spirit, to spread far and wide till the whole earth shall be filled with His glory.13
with true contrition of heart to confess their sins to God and implore forgiveness through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ our Savior.14
lzozozozoo
LikeLike
John Jay
PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; DIPLOMAT; AUTHOR OF THE FEDERALIST PAPERS; ORIGINAL CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT; GOVERNOR OF NEW YORK
Condescend, merciful Father! to grant as far as proper these imperfect petitions, to accept these inadequate thanksgivings, and to pardon whatever of sin hath mingled in them for the sake of Jesus Christ, our blessed Lord and Savior; unto Whom, with Thee, and the blessed Spirit, ever one God, be rendered all honor and glory, now and forever. 55
Unto Him who is the author and giver of all good, I render sincere and humble thanks for His manifold and unmerited blessings, and especially for our redemption and salvation by His beloved Son. . . . Blessed be His holy name.56
Mercy and grace and favor did come by Jesus Christ, and also that truth which verified the promises and predictions concerning Him and which exposed and corrected the various errors which had been imbibed respecting the Supreme Being, His attributes, laws, and dispensations.57
By conveying the Bible to people . . . we certainly do them a most interesting act of kindness. We thereby enable them to learn that man was originally created and placed in a state of happiness, but, becoming disobedient, was subjected to the degradation and evils which he and his posterity have since experienced. The Bible will also inform them that our gracious Creator has provided for us a Redeemer in whom all the nations of the earth should be blessed – that this Redeemer has made atonement “for the sins of the whole world,” and thereby reconciling the Divine justice with the Divine mercy, has opened a way for our redemption and salvation; and that these inestimable benefits are of the free gift and grace of God, not of our deserving, nor in our power to deserve. The Bible will also [encourage] them with many explicit and consoling assurances of the Divine mercy to our fallen race, and with repeated invitations to accept the offers of pardon and reconciliation. . . . They, therefore, who enlist in His service, have the highest encouragement to fulfill the du¬ties assigned to their respective stations; for most certain it is, that those of His followers who [participate in] His conquests will also participate in the tran¬scendent glories and blessings of His Triumph.58
I recommend a general and public return of praise and thanksgiving to Him from whose goodness these blessings descend. The most effectual means of securing the continuance of our civil and religious liberties is always to remember with reverence and gratitude the source from which they flow.59
The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.60
[T]he evidence of the truth of Christianity requires only to be carefully examined to produce conviction in candid minds… they who undertake that task will derive advantages.61
Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation, to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.62
LikeLike
QUITE ANOTHER TO IMPOSE THEM ON OTHERS.
Oh, the irony!
When the law said that sodomy was illegal, I guess one needn’t follow the law, eh?
And what would you call it, if not an imposition… indeed, the greatest imposition… by the queer nation, and the atheist minority before them, in imposing their collective will on the majority?
Let’s chisel those words in stone within the Supreme Court, to replace the erstwhile Ten Commandments.
If you think the Founding Fathers meant for the Supreme Court and the MSM to rule this nation, you have another think coming.
And we have another nation coming.
Til then… avaunt, thou fairies!
LikeLike
Actually, keeping sodomy illegal but unenforced was a great compromise because it gave both people what they really wanted. This is about the Left slapping Christianity in the face too, which was intended all along. It is meant to place the state in opposition to the church and render all believers outlaws. That is its true purpose above all. Trotsky, Lenin, Stalin, all of the leading Bolsheviks, were all Freemasons too.
LikeLike
Her opinion is that she is following a higher law than the corrupt law of man.
If many others do the same, then you might see things change.
LikeLike
Kentucky’s legislature did NOT pass a law requiring their clerks to issue marriage licenses to homosexuals.
Deal with it, those who are trying to lie this into the public consciousness.
LikeLike
Nope. It’s called civil disobedience. People of conscience refuse to obey unjust laws, and the state responds with clumsy brutality. This weakens the legitimacy of the state. It works.
The left responds to all dissent with unhinged narcissistic rage, so people of conscience will be getting a lot more chances to perform this little morality play. Good.
LikeLike
“weakens the legitimacy of the state. It works.”
Amen.
LikeLike
Well-said… but your snipe about the Pilgrims below was ill-measured.
LikeLike
Well-said… but your snipe about the Pilgrims below was ill-measured.
Those “Pilgrims” were the original Yankees, the same ones that wanted to canonize John Brown and plow salt into Southern ground for the sin of slavery. We don’t think much of them in the South either, but I get your point.
LikeLike
For Liberty, Freedom and Glory, the watchwords of they that would go, to the sound of the drum and bugle to vanquish the Federal foe…
Southern Soldier’s Farewell
LikeLike
When folks snipe about Pilgrims, it’s seldom a barb merely at the rabid fundamentalists… it’s more often a swipe at the entire “founding faith”.
LikeLike
Understood and never my intention.
LikeLike
waiting for the court to issue an arrest warrant for Obama for completely disregarding immigration law
LikeLike
waiting for (who can do it?) the military to arrest the 5 members of the Supreme Court who joined the Obergefell majority decision and have them tried for treason.
LikeLike
“It’s one thing to stand up for your beliefs, quite another to impose them on others. She could always resign.”
and they could always go to a different state. see how that works? or is this “imposing beliefs” a one way street?
LikeLike
She *is* following the law.
LikeLike
one still needs to follow the law
yes, and we “have” one, DOMA… Why wasn’t the Supreme Court curtly impeached … oh , yes, because Congress really doesn’t count.
Oh well, wait until the start of hangings of heretics from POZ. Cannot be that far.
LikeLike
Impose your beliefs? Like arrest her for not standing for disgusting sickos pretending they are like normal couples?
LikeLike
That’s the thing – instead of firing her for not doing her job, they are trying to make an example of her.
LikeLike
Yes! Why not just fire or dismiss her. Jailing for not issuing marriage licenses? While all Goldman ‘sacks’ men walk free?
Agreeing with her views or not misses a huge point.
Jail????
LikeLike
She can’t be fired. She’s an elected official, not an appointee.
LikeLike
One needs to follow the law?
At what point does one no longer need to follow the law? What does it take to ignore the law? Raping little white girls by the hundreds and thousands as in Rotherham and Oxford? Invading hordes of “refugees” which are 90% men? Targeting and killing whites and white cops?
When will you decide it is ok for you to break the law with rigorous equality as those who are out to destroy tou.
LikeLike
Ah, sounds like you haven’t actually read about King Nebuchadnezzar then.
LikeLike
Or perhaps disagree….
LikeLike
Lemme see if I understand…
When it comes to “gay marriage:” God grows wroth with those dumb enough to pretend it exists, Reason rejects it, all societies have scorned it, the USA never had it, it always failed when put to a vote and the state of Kentucky specifically legislated against it.
Yet after a handful of apostates and Jews (including a Spic and at least one sodomitical pervert) wave their magic wand, it is a “law” and Kim Davis is the one guilty of “imposing her views” on others? Is that about right?
LikeLike
I don’t recall Obama resigning after ignoring immigration law for the past 7 years, along with everything else. Nor do I recall any mayor of any sanctuary city resigning for ignoring immigration law either?
LikeLike
Great summary of the cuckservative’s approach to war. The enemy breaks oaths, ignore laws, shits on our venerated founding documents — attains its goal by any means necessary.
Meanwhile we self-righteously uphold old standards and are shocked and appalled that the feral opposition aren’t moved to disarmament by our heartfelt grammar-school accusations of hypocrisy. Reid dismantled the filibuster to get the result he wanted. McConnell reinstated it on principle.
The faggot right would rather never have power than to gain it hypocritically. That’s why they will be losers to the end. They are worse than the enemy; they are cowards, false friends, quislings. They have to be surgically removed from the body politic, or failing that, gnawed away with the growling jaws of animals.
LikeLike
But if the cuck needs a rational explanation of Davis’s righteousness, that’s not hard either.
We do not contract out the upholding of the innumerated and non-innumerated rights of the Constitution. Only supine weaklings with a mind of slavery would consider it the special job of nine robed masters a thousand miles away to defend his liberty. If SCROTUS said it, that’s the law. Aw, shucks.
It is every citizen’s duty to uphold, interpret, and enforce the explicit social contract that defines our nation. When, in the citizen’s opinion alone, a regime begins behaving lawlessly, it is his responsibility to resist it by every method available to him. That is the only way the citizen can retain his portion of ultimate sovereignty in a republic. By thinking and acting independently. If he is right, other free men will rally to him. If he is wrong, he will have to fight alone.
This is a concept wholly alien to most of humanity. Which is why we carved out a republic here for ourselves an ocean away on another continent, while the rest of you obedient eunuchs can seek out the next cock to suck for a couple of greasy shekels and a pat on the head.
“””Gay””” “””marriage”””! Our fathers would have laughed, told the perverts to GTFO, and shot them the next time they showed they dangled their dicks out of the closet. Meanwhile, we tie ourselves in knots trying to patiently explain things to deviants, wringing our hands about principles that last applied to the reality on the ground half-a-century ago.
Matt
LikeLike
Who’s Law, I ask thee?
LikeLike
Crap. The Pilgrims were the ancestors of the totalitarian cult that put this brave fat lady in jail.
The Pilgrims wanted religious freedom for themselves and exactly nobody else. They tolerated zero dissent in their colony.
LikeLike
George Washington
JUDGE; MEMBER OF THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS; COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF OF THE CONTINENTAL ARMY; PRESIDENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL CONVENTION; FIRST PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES; “FATHER OF HIS COUNTRY”
You do well to wish to learn our arts and ways of life, and above all, the religion of Jesus Christ. These will make you a greater and happier people than you are.121
While we are zealously performing the duties of good citizens and soldiers, we certainly ought not to be inattentive to the higher duties of religion. To the distinguished character of Patriot, it should be our highest glory to add the more distinguished character of Christian.122
The blessing and protection of Heaven are at all times necessary but especially so in times of public distress and danger. The General hopes and trusts that every officer and man will endeavor to live and act as becomes a Christian soldier, defending the dearest rights and liberties of his country.123
I now make it my earnest prayer that God would… most graciously be pleased to dispose us all to do justice, to love mercy, and to demean ourselves with that charity, humility, and pacific temper of the mind which were the characteristics of the Divine Author of our blessed religion.124
LikeLike
You’ve got some quality content GBFM. Love it.
LikeLike
GBFM, I can think of a large number of Catholics and Presbyterian Calvinists who spit on the ground at the mention of Pilgrims.
LikeLike
Carlos Danger no one asked your pasty white ass to our land. We left our fucking homelands to be rid of your totalitarian popery, as offensive then as today with its unquestioning fuhrerprinzip.
So why don’t you just shut the fuck up and get the hell out of here while you can? Go back to your Latin homeboys and do whatever the hell it is you want.
LikeLike
Fool… you think any cohesive and successful tribe tolerates dissent in the ranks? Especially when times are hard and survival is first order of business?
You fuckin’ sophomoric asses need a good lesson in not knowing where your next meal is coming from.
(((shakin’ mah haid)))
LikeLike
Greg,
like it or not, Whiskey is half right about this Puritan-ÝKW alliance. Historically, the Puritans were not uncriticized for their arrogance and hypocricy in the U.S. by Christian writers, especially once many of the old families became rich in the whaling and merchant porcelain, spice and silk trade with Japan, India and China on Clipper ships. This is how the Bushs became wealthy, for example. I refer you to Moby Dick and Ishmael’s frequent sarcastic comments regarding the “Good People of Nantuckett, who would make the world perfect by banning all sin. They had found the secret to Heaven on Earth and were busy bringing it about by enforcing their interpretation of the Bible. The only guy who catches more shit in that book is Ahab. Society needs safety valves and the Puritans don’t believe in them either and hence got kicked out of a lot of countries for being irritating too. Oliver Cromwell is one of the few men in history to have been dug up again and hanged twice. The Dutch too, are extremely hard to piss off. They are generous and decent to a fault as a people and back then, they were in their glory days of Calviniistic merchant prosperity and were among the earliest People to create social safety nets and make it socially admirable for wealthy to create charitable societies. These Folks kicked them out first. They became the driving sentiment behind punishing Reconstruction and the scars still haven’t really healed- witness the recent banning of the Battle Flag of The Army of Northern Virginia and the knee jerk equivalency with murdering 6,000,000!!!!!.
LikeLike
Pretty sure he meant that Puritans were intolerant fucks even by those standards.
LikeLike
I know his meaning… a very mean meaning.
And for the record, I don’t need no shitlib NOR Muzzie telling me about “intolerant fucks”… especially along the lines of Cathedralese slander against the White folks who founded this country.
LikeLike
Here’s what God Himself says about “tolerating dissent”:
Proverbs 6:
16
There are six things the Lord hates,
seven that are detestable to him:
17
haughty eyes,
a lying tongue,
hands that shed innocent blood,
18
a heart that devises wicked schemes,
feet that are quick to rush into evil,
19
a false witness who pours out lies
and a person who stirs up conflict in the community.
Now that you have been made wise, go and sin no more.
LikeLike
God didn’t write that. Humans did.
LikeLike
You call yourself “The Spirit Within” but what do you mean by that? Perhaps you could educate us all.
If a spirit resides in you, what is its role with regard to the non-spiritual you?
Does your spirit rule the non-spirit or vice versa?
Or do the two consult on a case-by-case basis and then proceed upon a show of hands?
Forget it. I don’t expect a reasonable answer.
The spirit within you is just a hamster.
LikeLike
@vd
Applause for the curiosity. You’re asking the right questions. The big ones.
LikeLike
“Spirit” is a cryptic term that the readership has come to understand to be an anal insertion object.
LikeLike
The eskimo within.
LikeLike
So much for that alleged Catholic upbringing. :duckface
StraponWithin is like the rock that gets tossed into the air and thinks it can fly.
Avaunt, impious fool. Thy anal cavity runneth over.
LikeLike
God wrote that through the natural law of the universe.
Isolate from the group those who are a menace for it is a common strategy to survive, and then they have right to set their own self destructive group.
If you don’t do it you will become extinct over the time.
LikeLike
My earliest American ancestor crossed the Atlantic in the 1630s. He was a Quaker who was “disenfranchised” by the Puritans for being a Quaker.
It is important to note, however, that the Puritans and the Pilgrims were separate people. Until 1692, Plymouth Plantation and Massachusetts were separate colonies. Eventually, the Pilgrims fell to Puritan conquest. The Puritans, not the Pilgrims, were the ancestors of the totalitarian death cult that utilizes all means available to achieve the death of western Civilization.
And I’d like to think that even those very ancestors, if they could see what they have wrought, would change their minds. If you could somehow show 21st century America through the eyes of tumblr and facebook to Sigmund Freud, Karl Marx, or Moses Maimonides, those men would giggle with delight. Show the same picture to Cotton Mather, and he would probably abandon Calvinism.
LikeLike
Good post. I have a long one in mod that makes a similar point.
LikeLike
No, it’s not a good post… it repeats the same ol’ tired shibboleths against “Puritans” and wrongly equates their behavior… indeed, their ideology… to the Satanic children about which Christ warned us.
Truly, you fucks have got to get off this jew-jitsu disingenuosity of laying today’s malaise off yesteryear’s Puritans… merely because George Carlin and South Park told you they were big meanies who made people keep their dicks in their pants.
(((shakin’ mah haid)))
LikeLike
[…] By CH […]
LikeLike
John Witherspoon
SIGNER OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE; RATIFIER OF THE U. S. CONSTITUTION; PRESIDENT OF PRINCETON
[C]hrist Jesus – the promise of old made unto the fathers, the hope of Israel [Acts 28:20], the light of the world [John 8:12], and the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth [Romans 10:4] – is the only Savior of sinners, in opposition to all false religions and every uninstituted rite; as He Himself says (John 14:6): “I am the way, and the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father but by Me.”136
[N]o man, whatever be his character or whatever be his hope, shall enter into rest unless he be reconciled to God though Jesus Christ.137
[T]here is no salvation in any other than in Jesus Christ of Nazareth.138
I shall now conclude my discourse by preaching this Savior to all who hear me, and entreating you in the most earnest manner to believe in Jesus Christ; for “there is no salvation in any other” [Acts 4:12].139
It is very evident that both the prophets in the Old Testament and the apostles in the New are at great pains to give us a view of the glory and dignity of the person of Christ. With what magnificent titles is He adorned! What glorious attributes are ascribed to him!… All these conspire to teach us that He is truly and properly God – God over all, blessed forever!140
[I]f you are not rec¬onciled to God through Jesus Christ – if you are not clothed with the spotless robe of His righteousness – you must forever perish.141
[H]e is the best friend to American liberty who is the most sincere and active in promoting true and undefiled religion, and who sets himself with the greatest firmness to bear down profanity and immorality of every kind. Whoever is an avowed enemy of God, I scruple not to call him an enemy to his country.142
LikeLike
As another commenter said a while back, if God doesn’t punish America, he owes Sodom and Gomorrah an apology.
LikeLike
All State-Sponsored marriage is now Faggot-Marriage. A State-Sanctioned “Wedding License” is State-Sponsored butthexting of your bride.
When the State inserts itself into your marriage, it also inserts itself into your anus and into wife, making you a Cuck.
Do not participate in State-Sponsored Cucking of yourself.
LikeLike
There’s a reason this blog gets commentators like da GBFM lzzzzzzzlzlz (TM). Fucking obsessive psycho.
[CH: the left is driven into a narcissistic rage by principled dissenters. yes, i like that.]
LikeLike
Gainsay what he says… THEN you can talk shit about the man himself.
Half-wit.
LikeLike
you misspepplelled lzzzzzzzlzlz !!!
u big dummeiss!!!
it’s lozlzlzlzlzoozlzozlzozozmzgzozzozoolzolz or lzozlzozozllzoozoz for short!
LikeLike
Ad hominem — the first refuge of the incompetent.
LikeLike
Truth in beauty.
LikeLike
What’s the alternative? Let her keep breaking the law forever?
[CH: the breakings shall continue until morale improves.]
LikeLike
. . . As will the jailings.
[CH: martyrs to the cause.]
LikeLike
Notice how the shitlibs suddenly become champions of Law & Order.
lzozlzozlzozlzozlzozlozlozlozlozlozlozl
[CH: shitlibs have raised hypocrisy to an art form.]
LikeLike
There are millions of hypocrites on both sides of the aisle. “Conservatives” are just as bad, if not worse.
[CH: nah, most hypocrites today are leftoids. see any race demographic of liberal swpl super zips.
anyhow i was talking about raising hypocrisy to an art form, which leftists have managed to do. i wasn’t saying there were NO hypocrites on the right.
but as usual you are a disingenuous, strawmanning, red herring throwing, rhetorically evasive shitlib, so you got that going for you.
which is gay.]
LikeLike
Depends on the law, of course.
If it’s an SJW law, then “the law is the law!”.
If it’s an intolerant shitlord law, then “the law must be changed zomg!”
LikeLike
The endless Trump fellatio pushed me over the edge. As has the barrage of confirmation bias, overgeneralization, false dichotomies, slippery slopes, suppressed evidence, and guilt by association.
The pretty lies, they flourish.
Moar game posts plz. Dance with what brung ya.
LikeLike
Exactly. Where wete the shitlibs when the law was segregation?
My lunch counter -I choose who sits there.
LikeLike
StraponWithin swoops in again… for yet another ass-whuppin’.
(((shakin’ it)))
LikeLike
“Notice how the shitlibs suddenly become champions of Law & Order.”
Exactly, none of them say – well that fucking Rosa Parks had it coming, why didn’t she just “follow the law” and move on back…
LikeLike
i’ve got yer law right here, punk.
LikeLike
muh law
LikeLike
A court invents a law via an absurd interpretation of the Constitution, then jails someone on contempt of court. The lady should reply, “ive been given no lawful orders to comply to”.
LikeLike
On a positive note, I was thinking the other day that at some recent point, the Liberal State is on an irreversible if not very perceptible at this time slide into oblivion.
This collapse of the moral legitimacy, the popular appeal of, general consent to and apparent permanence of 1954-launched Liberal project began with the acquittal of one George Michael Zimmerman by the jury of the 18th Judicial Circuit Court in Seminole County, Florida on the 13th of July, 2013.
LikeLike
No, that just means they’re going to have to become more severe in their methods of enforcement.
LikeLike
The more severe they become, the more legitimacy they lose. They’re on the road to morphing into a Stalinesque universally hated regime.
How many Americans will survive its gulags is a whole different matter. But at least this transformation will destroy any cultural appeal of this hellish ideology abroad, containing it within the slowly rotting corpse of once was a free nation.
LikeLike
This little fat lady has become Joan of Arc. I had always felt that the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage might have been the battle that lost the war. I have started to notice that defiance began to rise. Confederate flags being flown in upstate New York and all over the north, the level of defiance rising on social media.
This is going to be huge. This woman will not back down. And the outcry from the majority will rise up. This woman drew a line in the sand in a way that no cuckservative Republican politician dared. And the discussion of civil war, of uprising, of coup has never been higher. People are starting to literally begin to accuse the governments of the west and the Cathedral of collusion and conspiracy against its own peoples, and even of treason.
I have been doing research, and my advise to you is to search for this term “80% ar 15 lower” and get ready. Once you start reading about it, you’ll understand what I mean. And you better do it now while you can, even if you do nothing with it but stick it in a box in the ground. There is a whole community out there to teach and help you with this endeavor.
LikeLike
There are some states where you can still buy a rifle (or said AR lower in complete state, without the need for machining) from a private person…
The State be none the wiser as to who gots what… until they do some digging and tracing, if it comes to that… and if said private person who sold the rifle privately didn’t happen lose their records in a fire. 😉
And let’s face it… if the rifles don’t come out and fire a shot in anger, if and when the State lets it be known they’re hunting down all said rifles, well… all the hidden caches and partially-machined AR lowers aren’t going to do anyone much good anyway.
LikeLike
Well, the 80% lower is a start as for staying off the radar, certainly better than the alternative in terms of being harder to find, as well as a very affordable way to do it. better to have it not need it than the alternative . I think Vaughn had a stat that said, something like 700,000 ARs in Ct. and only 200,000 were registered.
Interesting though that finding and deporting 11 million illegal Mexicans would require a “police state” and be impossible but seizing 300 million guns in the hands of some of the most resourceful people in the world might be considered possible.
Perhaps I read too much internet like Anonymous Conservative. But you may not at all be interested in war or aggressive civil unrest, but it might end up being very interested in you. And if you have nothing, and tyranny is attempted to be forced upon you, then you would have to submit. Or if unrest pushes its way to your doorstep, then you stand there flat footed.
The cost of an unmilled polymer is about $60. I watched plenty of videos where some guy finished it with a hand drill, an exacto knife, and a dremel tool. There are parts kits for less than $60. I am just starting to research the upper prices. There are finished assemblies as cheap as $269 from PSA. Sure, not the best and most durable. But I bet I could shoot a face at 100 yards with it. (I learned to shoot in the Marines).
LikeLike
I look to civil disobediecne and then state seccession over the gun issue. Alabama would and so would many other American states.
LikeLike
http://www.armslist.com/
Filter options for state, locality, private/FFL sale, brand, caliber, action, etc.
LikeLike
Yep. Ohio – private sales, no paperwork required, no FOID, no tracking of even in-shop sales (although we can’t get past the background check, but they don’t report what you’re buying). You can even go to the local shop and buy a silence or full auto if you wish.
Lots of things out here in flyover country that the Leftoids are absolutely oblivious to. Which is fine by me.
LikeLike
Florida is free state. No
Registration at all. Will join North Carolina and Alabama at al.
LikeLike
I tried to search for that but my fingers kept typing “AK-47” instead.
LikeLike
1corinthians 1:27. This women became a Christian 5 yrs ago after 4 marriages, out of wedlock child birth, etc. she was washed in the blood of Jesus Christ and now shows more backbone and conviction in her belief then most life long church goers, churchians, etc. Those that are too prideful and arrogant to ever be broken, but appear to men as strong, are useless vessels unfit for service in Christ. God uses the weak to shame the mighty.
LikeLike
Confederate flags being flown in upstate New York and all over the north, the level of defiance rising on social media.
Really? Thank you, from the bottom of my heart. There is a God.
LikeLike
“The War of Northern Aggression” … 2.0.
LikeLike
You’re welcome Carlos, we are not laying down up here just yet. Come get em pajama boys.
LikeLike
and Donny T’s following is growing absolutely massive.
LikeLike
Purchase an M1891-32 Mosin Nagant and a spam can for it, preferably the scoped versions.
LikeLike
91/30 did you mean? My kids both have one of those. Tough as shut to cycle, but solid as a rock. Or club. The bullet going downrange knocks over all the other paper targets with its sonic boom, heh.
LikeLike
Yes.
LikeLike
Hi Mark, you like my flag? No one dares touch it, for the people around here are armed and very much on the same page. Most of us anyways.
-upstate guy
LikeLike
Keep this in mind, if the fta starts poking around for the lowers there are different rules for obstruction, tampering and destroying evidence on the federal level. Sometimes avoiding the bark is more painful than taking the bite….
LikeLike
How does TRUMP play it?
LikeLike
He’ll play it in some way that drives all the right people to distraction and self-harm. That is his art, and that is his life.
We are lucky to have a berserker on our side — for the most part and only for now, but I’ll take it and enthusiastically. Let him loose to kill, kill, kill. More destruction the better.
We are in the demolition stage of refurbishing the estate, with its rotting beams and listing frame and the rubbish of a hundred years of neglect and disrepair and squatters rights.
Matt
LikeLike
Ruger AR556. $615 out the door. Quality. Get it now. Ruger people are patriots. Made in North Carolina.
No excuse not to get one while you can.
LikeLike
If I believe the Massachusetts Supreme Court, which apparently found the right to gay marriage in their state constitution (approved in 1780), the Pilgrims would be all for it, since they secretly planted gay marriage in their constitution. The same way that the 14th Amendment not only anticipated gay marriage, but illegal anchor babies. Amazing the stuff hidden away in our legal documents! I imagine in a few years they will discover the right to polygamy and incest marriage, which have been hidden away in those documents the whole time!
But as much as I personally sympathize with Kim Davis, having to carry out such an obviously absurd court ruling, it’s still a court ruling. Her situation isn’t like the bakers and photographers who were forced into participating in gay marriage nonsense against their wills; Davis is the county clerk and her job is to issue this marriage certificates. In her situation, the principled thing to do is to resign.
If there is some consolation to this, Davis is probably the only Democrat who has actually been jailed for violating the law during the Obama administration.. Usually they just get a handwave.
LikeLike
I dont understand why all the erstwhile rebels suddenly bend over and say ITS THE LAW. If the law is evil, then it absolutely should be disobeyed by government agents. We are always complaining about government agents enforcing the law, and now suddenly, the fags have corrupted people so much that you actually agree with them?
LikeLike
Hey I’m no rebel. I’m a supporter of the old republic and it’s constitution. The rebels are the ones in the halls of power right now, making up phony constitutional mandates and ignoring their own laws when it comes to themselves.
LikeLike
They are printed between the lines in Lemon Juice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
How quaint of you to imagine we have a functioning republic with a venerated rule of law.
When are you going to start the pushback? When they pass an amendment to outlaw blue eyes?
Once you let one patent absurdity pass as normal — or in this case, as legally respectable in any way — the absurdities accumulate without resistance. A patriot doesn’t begin his revolution when the law recognizes his opposition as legitimate. No law could ever countenance revolution.
So you have neatly set all the predicates for you to accept your own demise. As long as it comes in discrete, reasonable, legal steps. Enjoy splitting hairs between bakers and county clerks, right up until you hear the knock on the door.
Matt
P.S. Stop saying “amazing…!” It’s a faggy leftist tic like “wow just wow.”
LikeLike
“When are you going to start the pushback? When they pass an amendment to outlaw blue eyes?”
You’re not really offering much of a pushback. What are you suggesting, that I “like” her Facebook?
In this particular, the real target is the ludicrous concept of gay marriage, it’s not standing behind a woman who violated a court order and got jailed as a result. You are sounding like an old soldier from General Lee’s Army who wants to give another try against the Yanks in 1868. World War G is over, and if you have a reasonable way to overturn popular opinion on this issue, let me know. But in the meantime I’m not going to support a person who is setting the precedent, not for Christians, but for Muslims. If you give them the religious veto you may well live to regret it.
LikeLike
Tree of Liberty…
LikeLike
… she be gettin’ a bit thirsty.
LikeLike
These two. Joint CotW nominee.
LikeLike
CH would have been a card in the days of de-segregation.
LikeLike
Naw, all would have ben right with the world.
LikeLike
Actually they came to set up a progressive utopia by using government and laws to shape humans into something better.
They are the fore runners of their yankee descendants, complete with the lust to use the law to enslave free Whites.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on The Americana.
LikeLike
4 out of 10. WNB.
LikeLike
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government.
LikeLike
George Orwell re-writes Animal Farm for 2015:
Two cocks good
One cock bad
LikeLike
Gold, Jerry! Gold!
LikeLike
Oh horseshit.
I’m not interested in any way shape or form in creating a precedent that’s gonna get jammed up your ass when the Sharia abiding clerk, the kosher clerk or Nation of Kill Whitey clerk gets elected. This fatass whore who is on marriage #4 just didn’t have the integrity to step away from her $80,000 a year gig she inherited from her mommy. I’m calling it now – – by the time she’s released she’ll have donations rolling in, a book offer and will go on a speaking tour to the snake-handler’s church circuit.
This had dick all to do with her religion.
[CH: diversity + proximity = war.
only now, in the end, do you understand.]
LikeLike
Exactly. If she gets away with claiming this as religious freedom, she’ll just set a precedent for the Muslims, who would not be shy in exercising their new powers at all.
LikeLike
Don’t cut yourself on all that edge, kid.
Remember… nobody ever lost their shirt selling gowns to the brides of Christ. God knows what’s in her heart.
LikeLike
Ha ha ha. As though “precedent” has any meaning or force under this hissy pissy tidal wave of leftist insanity.
On this same subject and just a few years ago, county clerks were issuing marriage licenses to queens in defiance of state and federal law. Nobody got jailed.
To this day, dozens of “sanctuary cities” openly defy federal authority and shelter criminal alien infiltrators from deportation.
Stop talking. Start doing. If you can’t see how Davis and Trump are providing an example for our side, you have a cuckold’s heart.
We can get back to niceties and formalities once we’ve neutralized the saboteurs. We Are At War. A cold civil war turning hot. Don’t be the last to grab a pitchfork.
Matt
LikeLike
[…] Source: Heartiste […]
LikeLike
A good subject of conversation: what does the Confederate flag mean yo you?
I’m not a Southerner. I’m an Eastern European living in a northish US state. Granted, I’ve traveled all through the South in the early 90s and have been buddies with heritage-conscious Southerners back in my Army days. But strictly speaking, it’s not my flag.
What the Confederate flag means to me is that it’s a symbol of my complete lack of respect for the prevailing, for the time being, liberal order and it’s enforcement arm known as the us government.
LikeLike
It’s Liberty, Freedom, and Glory. It’s the watchword of they that did go, to march to the drum and the bugle to vanquish the Federal foe.
It has become a symbol of resistance to centralized authoritarian power. We’re all Southerners now.
LikeLike
I am an Irish-American New Yorker who went to University in the South, so perhaps my perspective will help you here.
The Southerners do not call it “The Civil War”. For them it is “The War of Northern Aggression”. And, if you study that war, you will no doubt grow to call it “The War of Northern Aggression” as well.
For the Southerners, the Confederate Flag is akin to the Gadsden Flag: “Don’t Tread on Me”. It is a symbol of principle, union (with each other), and defiance. These United States were no longer united at that time, with the Southern States disagreeing with the Northern States on several matters of policy (slavery being only one of them). And so the Southern States sought to secede from the Union, as they were under the silly notion (sarcasm) that the Union was voluntary. And in response, the Northern States beat them down, slaughtered their people, and stole anything of worth in the process.
The Confederate Flag does not mean “we wanna put black people in chains” to Southerners. It means Stay Off Our Lawn.
LikeLike
It certainly beats that misshapen kerchief that the Nepalese came up with.
LikeLike
That is what it always was for the South.
LikeLike
Blood and soil.
Rebellion.
LikeLike
I’m afraid you don’t get to be a conscientious objector if you can avoid the legal obligation to which you object simply by resigning your job. Wanting to defy the law and continue to hold her office means that it is not about her conscience, but about her ability to impose her views on others.
Also, all these self-described red-pillers who still believe in the imaginary friends in the sky that their parents told them about. Real clear-eyed willingness to face up to the facts of human existence right there. Lulz.
[CH: gaysex is a major disease vector. lulz.]
LikeLike
If there’s no “imaginary friend in the sky” as you assert, then on what grounds do you object to Ms. Davis’ imposition of her views on others?
No moral Lawgiver –> no moral law –> no objective right or wrong –> “morality” determined by force –> we outnumber & will overpower you godless assholes –> we decide “morality” –> siddown & shaddup before you get hurt
Kinda unpleasant, no?
LikeLike
Ever read any pre-Christian philosophy? Greek, Roman? Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca?
If you don’t believe that you can have morality, ethics and normative standards for law without an imaginary sky-god, you lack imagination, education, and the capacity for moral reasoning that most of us were born with.
What the ancients described as “natural law” and the god-botherers attributed to their imaginary friends is now easily recognizable through the tools of evolutionary psychology as the natural selection of traits that enable societies to function and succeed.
LikeLike
Let’s get your foundation established here before we start poking around under the floor of your “morality” (descriptive, prescriptive, proscriptive, or otherwise).
Where exactly are you planting your flag: pre-Christian philosophy, evolutionary psychology, or someplace else?
LikeLike
Evolutionary psychology provides a perfectly sufficient explanation of our innate sense of morality and capacity for moral reasoning without resorting to supernatural explanations.
Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy demonstrate that a comprehensive system of philosophy, morality and law PRECEDED the idea of a god from which such things derived.
Both refute the suggestion that you can’t have morality without a belief in god.
LikeLike
Try to answer the question.
LikeLike
What I’m saying is perfectly clear. If it’s over your head, I can’t help you, mate.
LikeLike
Which worldview is yours, cupcake? I’m not going to refute someone else’s, just to entertain you.
LikeLike
What do you mean by world view?
I made one statement about the history of pre-Christian western philosophy, and I made one statement about evolutionary psychology.
Both are correct.
LikeLike
world·view (wərldˈvyo͞o)
noun
a particular philosophy of life or conception of the world.
LikeLike
I’m an empiricist, obviously.
LikeLike
So your worldview isn’t rooted in pre-Christian philosophy, nor in evolutionary psychology. Have I got that right?
LikeLike
It’s “rooted” in those things the same way as it’s “rooted” in gravity, the first law of thermodynamics and the French Revolution – which is to say, I try to take into account the relevant observable facts.
Now are you going to filibuster all night, or are you going to try to say something interesting?
LikeLike
I’ll refute your godless “morality” if you can muster the mental focus to explain which of the thousands of extant systems is the one to which you subscribe.
As far as I can decipher your addled attempts to make a coherent point, you so far have claimed to be an empiricist, and a believer in pre-Christian philosophy, and a believer in evolutionary psychology.
LikeLike
I believe that pre-Christian philosophy existed. I believe that evolutionary psychology explains the moral instincts and capacities of human beings.
Are you really finding this hard to understand?
LikeLike
Congratulations. We’re all deeply impressed by your acknowledgment of a basic historical fact taught to any 6th grader with a pulse and two neurons to rub together.
Finally, a semi-clear statement. Took you long enough.
Now tell me where the prescriptive authority of your system of morality comes from. That is, when you assert something like “Heywood ought to treat same sex unions as marriages,” explain why I shouldn’t just take it as a preference statement like “Heywood ought to like chocolate ice cream, which is the yummiest of the yummy.” Where’s the authority, the power, the oughtness of such “morality?”
Unbunch your panties, sperg.
I find it hard to understand how you reconcile your supposed empiricism with your faith in evolutionary psychology and your reliance on pre-Christian philosophy. These are three different worldviews, with several contradictions between them. You can’t subscribe to all three at once and be coherent. Pick one, dim bulb.
LikeLike
Hesiod, around 700 BC. Clearly the concept of divinely ordained law has a long enough pedigree.
LikeLike
Instincts hardly form an irrefutable foundation for justice.
LikeLike
Plato, Aristotle, Cicero, Seneca?
Yes. All of them at least made sacrifices to different imaginary sky Gods and all three were also really closet deists and monotheists. Stoicism is known as the Pagan bridge to Christianity and Plato’s Timaeus was also instrumental as a work in converting the educated wealthy classes to Christianity. Jesus had probably read Plato and Aristotle as well and most of the basic ethics and moralty agree with each other, but they also cover different facets of existence too. The first three are more earthly in their focus.
LikeLike
Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy demonstrate that a comprehensive system of philosophy, morality and law PRECEDED the idea of a god from which such things derived.
Every one of them thought that they were divinely inspired. Ever hear of the Divinity of numbers? Plato saw it as a sea of consciousness that had varying levels of compürehension and access to its secrests but he saw it as swimming in the arms of God and a superior being who created the world. You are presenting revisionist evidence as true.
LikeLike
Hesiod, now THAT was a red pill guy.
LikeLike
LikeLike
It’s “rooted” in those things the same way as it’s “rooted” in gravity, the first law of thermodynamics and the French Revolution
@Mork
Oh, this is rich. The French Revolution? As in, libertardery, equaltardery, brotherhood with all men including groids and the religion of pieces? That French Revolution?
(shakin’ mah haid)
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy demonstrate that a comprehensive system of philosophy, morality and law PRECEDED the idea of a god from which such things derived.
Yeah… and it’s also interesting that the Greeks and Romans became the core of Christianity, is it not? Of course, that wouldn’t make sense to you. I suppose you’re into atheist-friendly bullshit like Epicureanism and Neoplatonism, amirite?
LikeLike
Good stuff, Heywood.
LikeLike
Thanks. Dumb bastard doesn’t understand that he can’t simultaneously be an empiricist while subscribing to evolutionary psychology and to a hazy mishmash of pre-Christian Greco-Roman philosophy.
LikeLike
D’oh! We collectively forgot to read the pre-Christian pagans. Our bad.
Fill us in, “Mork.” Preferably with plenty of edge.
LikeLike
Shazbot!
LikeLike
With clear-eyed willingness I see that human existence depends on penis and vagina. Anything else is an idealogical delusion and an evolutionary dead end. Babies grow in wombs, not colons.
LikeLike
Unlike the SJWs of today, the ancients weren’t total ‘tards. Go back to blowing Orson, Mork.
LikeLike
Wha, AGAIN with this “impose views upon others” tripe, as if it’s the curse of the ages?
Where were all you fucks when atheists and queers were imposing THEIR will?
Disingenuous sophomoric ass.
Ah, and there’s the n1gger in the woodpile showing his face. Never known it to fail, the amusing irony of those who would first proclaim what does and does not constitute valid conscientious objection, while chompin’ at the bit to throw in the ol’ neener neener about folks with faith, and denigrate the Most High, the Creator of the Universe, as an “imaginary sky friend”.
Avaunt, you half-wise pismire… you’ve only learned enough at community college Philosophy 101 and episodes of South Park to make yourself ridiculous.
LikeLike
It’s the only card in the relativist’s deck.
Ask them to explain it and you get the neckbeard equivalent (i.e., sixteen paragraphs) of “it’s turtles all the way down.”
Ay, me. Remember when self-styled provocateurs used to provoke? We ask for worthy enemies and solid criticism, and we get … gnats.
LikeLike
Mork san, I am neither Christian but i think this is wrong, just as religious people should accept that gays DO exist no matter what they believe, and is absurd to put us in jail for existing, secular people should accept that even making gay marriage legal, people like her will keep existing, what is the point of putting her in jail like in Saudi Arabia or India? no
LikeLike
“Evolutionary psychology provides a perfectly sufficient explanation of our innate sense of morality and capacity for moral reasoning without resorting to supernatural explanations.”
Evolutionary psychology (science) “explains” how. People seek out religion in the name of “why.” Evolutionary psychology and religious belief are hardly mutually exclusive.
“Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy demonstrate that a comprehensive system of philosophy, morality and law PRECEDED the idea of a god from which such things derived.”
Naturally. But people aren’t robots. Beliefs should be guided by reason. But because we’re human as opposed to programmable machines, they’re is always going to be an emotional layer to them which is sub-rational which religion taps into. This does not imply that religion needs to contradict reason. It should ideally work in tandem with it. People don’t commit acts of bravery and sacrifice (kamikazes or monks setting themselves on fire) because you show them a logical computer program called “this is good,” though. There is a mystical quality that MOTIVATES deep spiritual belief and solidifies conviction (which is again, guided by reason). Religious forms have a way of motivating humans in all sorts of ways. You’re not going to “it’s science, dummy” religion out of existence because the two are mostly addressing different root questions.
“Both refute the suggestion that you can’t have morality without a belief in god.”
Of course you can have morality without god. Neo-Aristotleans certainly believe this and that’s perfectly fine. But perhaps you’re asking all the wrong questions, here. And I say this as someone who is not religious, himself. Religion and a metaphysical belief in a god or gods can be used for all sorts of ends. For much of human history, it has been used to ennoble the human race. In it’s debased form (low church), it can be used to make a mockery of man. (When people like Dawkins attack “religion,” they are attacking low church rather than the beliefs of someone serious like St. Thomas Aquinas.)
LikeLike
Ancient Greek and Roman philosophy demonstrate that a comprehensive system of philosophy, morality and law PRECEDED the idea of a god from which such things derived.”
No, they thought up philosophies of morality at first because they were afraid that if they offended the gods, the gods would exact revenge.
LikeLike
The only way to justify moral without God is the threat of the social punishment upon the head of the sinners.
But why are you to fear social penalties if you can run away or kill yourself and avoid it??
God is unavoidable.
You need a motive to doesn’t do it, and the only one is scientific prove accomplishment Darwinist goals and their subsequent award. Gay, abortion, multiracial society, feminism, all against human basic nature.
Moral also exist with a cause: to provide cultural support for Darwinian goals.
That sets aside the two rational basis to abide moral rules in our current system.
What are you saying with moral reasoning?? Feelings?? Reasoning can’t justify moral behavior in a non Darwinian goals oriented society. There is no place to “moral reasoning” just reason or feelings, and the latest is for women and betas.
Of course all is easier with God.
Is that enough red-pill ??
LikeLike
The message is clear: the govt is willing to trample on what people consider right in order to protect the interests of a minority of degenerates.
LikeLike
Hang on. You have this entirely the wrong way round. A majority of Americans support same sex marriage. It’s the law of the land. This woman is a government official. What you are saying is that you support the right of government officials to apply their own minority views on the rest of us if they prefer them to the laws of the country.
if your views lean libertarian, you should be horrified at the thought that government officials could exercise their powers in accordance with their personal preferences, rather than what the law says.
LikeLike
Exactly. Be a freak and you got a voice. Integrity is old fashioned and lame. Maybe even punishable by law. Freak Train sounding louder, everyone ride the Freak Train…
LikeLike
“Principled religious objector”? The woman is on her third husband, and cuckolded her first. She is a typical aging harpy seeking attention and affirmation. Some fights have no real good guys.
LikeLike
We can only hope more follow her example.
It seemed unlikely, but I’m starting to wonder if the Obama presidency actually did deal the death blow to America. Helped in the end by John Roberts to finish it off. The death struggle began long before that, of course, but now little seems to remain except empty words.
LikeLike
Flashpoint: White House Confirms Russian Presence In Syria, Warns It Is “Destabilizing
This presence will be increased with Assad growing weaker. The West is seeking to undercut Russian access to the EU natural gas market The West is not really serious about taking out ISIS. A U.S. Armored Brigade Task Force with air support could cut through ISIS like butter and take maybe 200 casualties, in under two weeks. We would send in ten or twelve for that mission.
LikeLike
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-09-03/flashpoint-white-house-confirms-russian-presence-syria-warns-it-destabilizing
Forgot the link
LikeLike
The SU 34 is a studly plane. Check out footage of the Su-27 it’s base design’s performance at air shows.
LikeLike
SU 25 vs A10
which is best?
LikeLike
Don’t know.
LikeLike
The concept of a supernatural being is atavistic nonsense. It sucks that so many right wingers want to base their opposition to the Left on bad metaphysics and ancient superstitions. With regards to Christianity, its based on a book of Jewish fables and specifically their malevolent desert god. And by the way, Uncle Adolph hated Christianity. He called it the original Jewish Bolshevism. Read his “Table Talks” where he continually lambastes Christianity.
As for this clerk, she should just have been fired and removed from the premises. But of course the Left wants to make an example of her. Yes, the Left is evil but that doesn’t mean that fighting in the name of a religion based on a bronze age sky wizard represents fighting for the white race. Many would argue that Christianity itself has been a terrible foundation to set European civilization on and in the end is the biggest enemy of the white race.
LikeLike
At least according to albion’s seed, the Pilgrims (Puritans) were not interested in religious freedom for all. They just wanted it for themselves. They were more than happy to persecute others like the Quakers.
One thing that has been forgotten in American history is that the state that fought the hardest against the establishment clause of the 1st amendment and was the last to implement it was Massachusetts.
LikeLike
One of the few times someone in the U.S. actually gets punished for abuse of authority, and you’re still not happy.
On the other hand though, this is what you get for allowing state involvement with marriage in the first place. It is a religious and family issue, not a civil one. The only thing the state should do in marriage is make sure whatever contract was made between the people wasn’t violated.
LikeLike
If you saw or heard the news footage then you heard the shrieks of glee: “Love wins!” over and over.
I’d have a lot more respect for these people if they were honest about what they want: The benefits of marriage. Has nothing to do with love. Loveless marriages still include those partner benefits.
LikeLike
Sometime this week the CBC’s As Shit Happens radio program covered the Kim Davis story. They audibly couldn’t wait to. Even on radio you could see the smirking and winking. This was a perfect story. Backwards middle Americans acting all backwards. So, what? Here’s what. This was also when another American, Roosh V, captured the attention of the Mayor of Toronto and the Canadian media. Funny, no mention of Roosh. Imagine.
LikeLike
Lash:
1) How much of Canada secretly wishes it could be a no apologies US style, heavily armed redneck with a hi cap .45 in his glove box and several ARs at home?
2) Politeness. What’s up with the soft spoken, prudent man, sensible politeness and NPR voices everywhere? Is it in your blood or do they beat it in you from birth?
LikeLike
I think what people resent the most is saying it’s the same thing as a man and a woman being married when it is not. if they’d called it fagrriage and dykrriage noone would care except the weirdos who would still be butt hurt that everyone doesn’t agree that it’s normal. that’s what the fight is about, are we going to call deviancy normal?
LikeLike
I always loved Thoreau’s Civil Disobedience essay. A favorite quote of mine:
“For eighteen hundred years, though perchance I have no right to say it, the New Testament has been written; yet where is the legislator who has wisdom and practical talent enough to avail himself of the light which it sheds on the science of legislation?”
LikeLike
More from this. . .
“He who gives himself entirely to his fellow-men appears to them useless and selfish; but he who gives himself partially to them is pronounced a benefactor and philanthropist.”
Was gonna say rather prescient of him, but, the more things change, the more they stay the same.
LikeLike
The war is on, motherfuckers. The communist crackdown has begun. Get ready.
Mr. Marshall has made his decision. Now let us see him enforce it.
LikeLike
Great Britian continues its cultural enrichment and “bows to pressure,” letting thousands of Syrian refugees into its country.
Cameron is a pussy who bowed to the feels after a viral picture of a drowned Syrian boy made the rounds.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/03/cameron-bows-to-pressure-to-allow-more-syrian-refugees-into-britain?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
LikeLike
@gbfm–are you getting your quotes from a book or website? I’d like to read more. Thanks for posting
LikeLike
Need you ask? Theao grzgzgrgrzzeat boioiooklzozllzl for Mzozlmen.
LikeLike
da gbfm invented a time machine
traveled back to 1774
gave all deses quoetsz of wisdomz to the foundning fatherszz
and traveled back to 2015 to score some
punnani with benrkankifed chiccksz
and post da quotes of wisdom heere
lzozolzolzlzolzol
LikeLike
You definitely best commenter of all word of presscraft.
LikeLike
It’s not really ironic. It’s the modern day pilgrims who are imposing this ideological totalitarianism. The Puritans who settled the Massachusetts area were considered radical universalists (all are equal under god). Their ideology found a beachhead here and evolved from its original form, to the abolitionists of the 1800s, the suffragettes, the civil rights movement, and now the SJWs of today. They preached religious freedom when they were entryists with little power, but now that they’re the status quo they won’t tolerate any ideological heresy. I’m surprised you don’t read more NRX.
LikeLike
This woman is in jail because she refuses to do her job, not because of her religious beliefs. Not only am I opposed to same-sex marriage, I think it’s one of the silliest concepts imaginable. But, it’s also the law now. Your religious convictions don’t give you the right to hold a particular job or office and refuse to perform an essential function of that job.
This woman should have just quit. But, she wants to be a martyr so she can make bank on a future GoFundMe page and book deal. A woman who’s been divorced talking about the sanctity of marriage is a joke.
LikeLike
None of the jews who fought for gay marriage are real jews?
13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.
It’s clear as day. That is the word of their God, according to them.
This is why you guys say they are the children of Satan?
How can the Pope say what he just said? Do Catholics believe the Old Testament is still part of their Bible, or not?
LikeLike
last one:
None of the jews who fought for gay marriage and are running our country are real jews?
13 “‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.”
Period. It’s clear as day. That is the word of their God, according to them.
This is why some say they are the children of Satan?
How can the Pope say what he just said?
Do Catholics believe the Old Testament is still part of their Bible, or not?
Serious question. No troll. How can modern “churchians” who accept gays even pretend to claim to be Christians who believe the Bible is the Word of God?
How can a pastor or priest or the Pope even begin to say that gay marriage (or one act of gay sex) warrants anything but a death penalty? That’s the Word of God, according to them!!
The answer can only be that they don’t expect the sheeple to actual ready the Bible.
LikeLike
I would argue that the Unitarianism of the Puritans is the foundation for genderlessness and homosexual marriage. Anyone who has lived in Cambridge or the Back Bay and knows member of the Harvard Arts and Science Faculty would understand this in a flash.
LikeLike
Heartiste is probably my favourite blog. It’s well-written – with so much wisdom to be gleamed. I owe a lot to my game from reading this site over the past few years. But it gets it badly wrong on some of these knee-jerk matters.
The people who refuse to sanction gay marriage on account of their “religious beliefs” are hypocrites and mental midgets, and Heartiste is smart enough to realise this. if they’re following some law passed down to them in an ancient book written by a bunch of men, then they’re going to have to be consistent. This book, after all, sanctions child murder if the child disobeys their primary caregivers. It also promotes slavery. It also asks that we don’t wear more than one type of fabric at the one time. Or eat pork. Ad nauseum. The reason male-on-male butt-sex is given special attention is because it appeals to people’s raw prejudice and icky feelings about such matters.
I do not give a solitary fuck if two guys want to rail each other, or get married. There are simply far worse things happening in the world that are contributing to the destruction of our culture and planet. Intelligent, rational people have fixed their ire elsewhere.
LikeLike
I wouldn’t be so quick to rush to defend the likes of Kim Davis (or whatever her name is) if I were you.
Kim Davis is badly behaved slut. She has been married 4 times. She cheated on her first husband with the man who would become her 3rd husband and gave birth to the cuckoo egg child WHILE SHE WAS STILL MARRIED TO HUSBAND 1.
She then married her beta 2nd husband, only to divorce him years later to be with her alpha cad 3rd husband. She was only able to hold onto this guy for 1 year. He left her and she remarried her chump 2nd husband. Why did this guy even take her back????
Who is she to say that she’s better than gay people? The reason why I’m not anti-gay is because straight people these days are so promiscuous, adulterous, and full of evil that they have no business putting constraints on gays.
[CH: i see that you are just like a good leftoid, doing your character assassination opposition research to evade the main issue.
ps i thought all you leftoids were fans of single mommery?
pps gaysex is a major vector of disease and gays are over-represented among the mentally ill and psychologically imbalanced.]
LikeLike
Bulldog Drummond called… he wants his surveillance equipment back.
LikeLike
They are still now permitted to legally marry, and a state official who tries to bar them from doing so is breaking the law. If she did not want to be in the position, she should have quit instead of abusing her authority.
LikeLike
small world…I went to college in Rowan county..good folks there
LikeLike
[…] Originally posted by da GBFM lzzzzzzzlzlz (TM) as a comment at Chateau Heartiste. […]
LikeLike
America was founded by religious hardliners who felt that the mainstream establishment was too liberal and tolerant. History repeats and irony doesn’t mean what you think it does.
LikeLike
Gay marriage is one of those beleaguered topics that is laughably easy to resolve. Allow it and be done with it. After decades of fumbling around, the Supreme Court finally came around and set the record straight (pun intended).
Those who work for the government are required to follow the law so it’s a no-brainer that an employee may face consequences for disobeying the rules while acting in an official capacity. Especially when following said rules would have caused no negative personal consequences whatsoever.
The crux of the issue is a fundamental lack of understanding among society of what it means to live in a free society. Few would argue for the benefits of such freedom, but many, particularly of the conservative persuasion, cannot accept that others may choose or be compelled to live their lives in ways that are different from their own.
The litmus test is whether different patterns of behavior impose ill consequences on those non-involved and non-consenting. Gay marriage causes no such thing. It is perfectly innocuous for those not inclined to partake in homosexual relationships.
An argument can be made whether jailing people in lieu of relieving them of their government post is the best course of action, but that is a different discussion requiring a separate line of reasoning.
LikeLike
Why Rowan County? It’s deep eastern Kentucky. It has about 24k inhabitants; the county seat, Morehead, has about 8k. Most of the county is dry, says Wiki. Lexington, a much larger and more ‘sophisticated’ place, is two hours down I-64. Cincinnati and Louisville can both be reached in an additional two hours. The idea that a few homosexuals may have been refused marriage licenses in Morehead does not strike me as worthy of a week’s national attention. I wonder what they are doing in Rowan County at all; the place sounds like gay Kryptonite. The whole uproar seems contrived.
LikeLike
Pilgrims weren’t escaping religious persecution. They were bringing a new brand of moral preening and outcasting of the evil-doers as the new dominant culture. They continue to do so today. Yankee America hails from these people which should be obvious.
LikeLike
Great post. Pilgrims may have worked .gov jobs but they were principled about it.
LikeLike
Pilgrims cried about a lot of shit. Get over it.
LikeLike
The pilgrims, puritans, etc were insufferable control freaks and that’s why they had to leave Europe. The control freakism has been part of things in this country ever since and how the government eventually ended up with the power to say who could marry who.
Because the government got involved and has become permissive of homosexuals becoming married now it has to be approved of and accepted by everyone or else. If marriage had remained out of government hands, remained in the realm of private agreement, religious traditions, religious institutions, etc then people could live and let live and not have to approve of others’ behavior and choices.
LikeLike