Non Married Cohabitation Should Be Illegal

[Rusha]

Jesus loved his own people, the low classes of the peasant orders, betrayed by the upper class which had turned quisling, greedy, ignoring the rules and laws layed down for them, copying the Hellenic values of the Romans. There was no middle class.

Read the Gospel of Mark. Most of it is a record of the memoirs of Cephas, passed on/down for only twenty years by oral tradition. Jesus was for his own, as was John the Baptist.

And Jesus never called himself 'Lord', nor 'Christ'..... he didn't speak Greek. He often referred to himself as 'Son of Man'. Church? Jesus was for his own, the subdued, mistreated, cheated and downtrodden working class Jews.

I still read hate in your sentences. For me it seems as if you turn a good message into a tortured scream. That's just the way I see it.

:thumb: Kudos to you for actually "walking the walk".

 

[eider]

:thumb: Kudos to you for actually "walking the walk".

Wow! Thankyou.
Praise from you is praise indeed.

 

[Arthur Brain]

Our laws, before we became a pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro cohabitating, pro pornography society, were based on Judeo-Christian doctrine (and fortunately some laws still are based on Judeo-Christian doctrine).

You had implied that in order to legislate and enforce such laws, that our society would first have to be a "theocracy". When those laws were in place prior to secular humanists taking over, to my knowledge no one ever accused the United States of being a "theocracy", why would it be so in the future if it wasn't in the past?

People have been free to worship (or not worship) the religion of their choice throughout the history of the United States, why all of the sudden a concern about a state religion Arthur?

Western law used to tolerate the segregation of black people along with denying people the freedoms we now have in the West. What you advocate would return the West to those draconian days of ignorance. You propose locking people up simply for being gay for cryin' out loud. You base your "arguments" for all of these proposals on "Godly righteous government" which is actually just you wanting to impose your zealous garbage on all and sundry. You're a totalitarian nutball.

 

[Arthur Brain]

So you're into dudes.

Good to see that Musty's acting like his usual, predictable pratt self again there...

lain:

 

[Arthur Brain]

It might come as a bit of a shock to you, but in an age of practicality, things of practicality are permitted- not privilege.

The way the white men saw it, was that it was their country- they found it, they built it, they ran it. Problem? Protest it. But don't it there and call the home owner wicked for not allowing others to dictate their own abode.

That's the thing about you liberal folk, which never fails to ring true- you think you're just entitled to things because *reasons* and all of history should have reflected just that.

The truth is that you all want things to be fair.. and yet not fair. You want an oxymoron of a social working.

Sorry dude but I've neither the patience or inclination to bandy words with some dumb misogynistic kid with a monumental chip on his shoulder.

:e4e:

 

[Crucible]

Sorry dude but I've neither the patience or inclination to bandy words with some dumb misogynistic kid with a monumental chip on his shoulder.

:e4e:

Nah, you just don't have the intelligence which is why you resort to what you just stated. In fact, this thread was just for those as yourself to baldly ridicule what you don't like because nothing else avails :wave:

 

[Arthur Brain]

Nah, you just don't have the intelligence which is why you resort to what you just stated. In fact, this thread was just for those as yourself to baldly ridicule what you don't like because nothing else avails :wave:

No, I simply have no time for juvenile little misogynists and their particular brand of bandwidth waste.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

No, I simply have no time for juvenile little misogynists and their particular brand of bandwidth waste.

Did your pimp buy you a dictionary?

 

[Arthur Brain]

Did your pimp buy you a dictionary?

Does your catechism encourage you to post innuendo tripe like this?

 

[Crucible]

No, I simply have no time for juvenile little misogynists and their particular brand of bandwidth waste.

This thread is a waste of bandwidth. What was the point of it?

Anything to keep your few fans, I suppose :chuckle:

 

[Arthur Brain]

This thread is a waste of bandwidth. What was the point of it?

Anything to keep your few fans, I suppose :chuckle:

The point was evident to those who can think outside of a doctrinal or prejudiced box - or pretty much to those who can just actually think. You don't count. All you are is some guy with a borderline sociopath mindset in regards to women and who doesn't warrant any respect simply in light of that puerile misogyny you wear as if it's a badge of pride. Please take your patriarchal bollocks someplace where it might be appreciated, like a latrine, or one of CC's Trump threads...

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

Our laws, before we became a pro abortion, pro homosexuality, pro cohabitating, pro pornography society, were based on Judeo-Christian doctrine (and fortunately some laws still are based on Judeo-Christian doctrine).

You had implied that in order to legislate and enforce such laws, that our society would first have to be a "theocracy". When those laws were in place prior to secular humanists taking over, to my knowledge no one ever accused the United States of being a "theocracy", why would it be so in the future if it wasn't in the past?

People have been free to worship (or not worship) the religion of their choice throughout the history of the United States, why all of the sudden a concern about a state religion Arthur?

Western law used to tolerate the segregation of black people along with denying people the freedoms we now have in the West. What you advocate would return the West to those draconian days of ignorance. You propose locking people up simply for being gay for cryin' out loud. You base your "arguments" for all of these proposals on "Godly righteous government" which is actually just you wanting to impose your zealous garbage on all and sundry. You're a totalitarian nutball.

Again: I'm failing to see the connection between legislating laws that would prohibit things such as couples co-habitating, which as I'd shown, has been extremely harmful to society due to things like abortion and fatherless homes, and mandating a state religion.

Perhaps you could explain yourself better Art.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

My condolences on the loss of your first wife, I can't imagine the pain.

Thankyou for those kind words.

I was assuming that your first and current wives were/are female; based on some of your later posts, I'm questioning that.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Actually a righteous civil government has that right, along with a society that has strong mores' that frown upon immoral behavior.

That sounds like an extract straight out of 1984.
Any government that might try to control the togetherness of couples, any couples, and sees itself as righteous, would be suffering from extreme schizophrenia. But then, I haven't witnessed an 'all-righteous' government.... ever.

"any couples" covers quite a wide array of possibilities: child-adult, same-sex, incestuous, bestial, etc. etc. etc. (and why must that couple only consist of two people, why not allow 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 people to be involved in a relationship, they "love" as well?).

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
I'd shown in an earlier post that cohabitation on a large scale brings about loss of life (abortion) and dysfunctional homes where children frequently grow up without the guidance of a dad in the house.

Look..... folks find what they desperately search for.
A couple of examples?
Atheist Archeologist fails to find enough evidence for habitation on (early 1st century) Nazareth and so holds up his hands in 'glorious' success and writes a book called 'the myth of Nazareth'! Amateurs!
Another? Probably your findings, trying to seek control of people's togetherness.
The first, and most probably the second examople, are typical of agenda driven 'success from failure' non-science.

Back to the facts behind cohabitation: Abortion, fatherless homes; which means pain and misery for the people involved and the innocent victims of those cohabitating couples (children).


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Art Brain's attempt at a joke isn't so funny to those of us that have studied the results of cohabitation, and see it in today's moral relativist society.

I like the way Art writes. When people have love, it exudes from everything that they say, do and (in this case) write. Humour is a deadly way of putting down wrongness.

Obviously you think that dead unborn babies and kids growing up without a dad in their home (who frequently turn to drugs and crime) is some kind of joke.

 

[eider]

I was assuming that your first and current wives were/are female; based on some of your later posts, I'm questioning that.

Obviously you did not read my post which described my first and second marriages.
My first wife bore two sons and a daughter. You need to do your best to figure out her sex, using this information.
My second wife is female, and from this info you can make a guess at my sexuality.

"any couples" covers quite a wide array of possibilities: child-adult, same-sex, incestuous, bestial, etc. etc. etc. (and why must that couple only consist of two people, why not allow 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 people to be involved in a relationship, they "love" as well?).

Tell me...... do you dwell intensely upon other couples, who they might be, how they might show their love to each other?

Back to the facts behind cohabitation: Abortion, fatherless homes; which means pain and misery for the people involved and the innocent victims of those cohabitating couples (children).

No...... back to your perception of the world.
You manage to spin 'evil' and badnmess whever you wish to find it. In my country, all our Courtrooms have a large engraved sign which hangs above the Magistrates' or Judge's bench. 'Honi soit qui mali pense!'
........... which means: Evil be, who evil thinks.

Obviously you think that dead unborn babies and kids growing up without a dad in their home (who frequently turn to drugs and crime) is some kind of joke.

You posts reek with the stench of incurable and incorrigible prejudice. Open your heart and mind to objective truth.
You see only what you want to see. You believe subjectively that all unChristian unmarried couples are evil. You believe that anybody who supports Gay Marriage must be Gay, or Gay in some way.
Your ideas about who seeks abortions are horribly subjective to your own dreadfully bigoted viewpoints.

Honi Soit Qui Mali Pense!

 

[gcthomas]

(and why must that couple only consist of two people, why not allow 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 people to be involved in a relationship, they "love" as well?).

These exist already, though I'm sure you'd love to make it illegal.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

...(and why must that couple only consist of two people, why not allow 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 people to be involved in a relationship, they "love" as well?).

These exist already, though I'm sure you'd love to make it illegal.

Other than homosexual activists such as UK singer Elton John and his 'husband' and smut magazine writer Dan Savage and his 'husband' being involved in threesomes (I believe the French call it "menage' a trois"), I'm not aware of polygamous relationships (marriage) being legal in the US or your UK.

 

[aCultureWarrior]

Quote Originally Posted by aCultureWarrior

I was assuming that your first and current wives were/are female; based on some of your later posts, I'm questioning that.

Obviously you did not read my post which described my first and second marriages.
My first wife bore two sons and a daughter. You need to do your best to figure out her sex, using this information.
My second wife is female, and from this info you can make a guess at my sexuality.

Looking back a couple of pages, I see that you did address that in your post to your fellow pagan and sexual anarchist Rusha.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
"any couples" covers quite a wide array of possibilities: child-adult, same-sex, incestuous, bestial, etc. etc. etc. (and why must that couple only consist of two people, why not allow 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 or 8 people to be involved in a relationship, they "love" as well?).

Tell me...... do you dwell intensely upon other couples, who they might be, how they might show their love to each other?

Yes, I'm one of those nosy busy bodies that frowns upon things like pedophilia and pederasty, homosexuality, incest and the long list of other sexual sins and perversions that you can't seem to condemn.


Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Back to the facts behind cohabitation: Abortion, fatherless homes; which means pain and misery for the people involved and the innocent victims of those cohabitating couples (children).

No...... back to your perception of the world.
You manage to spin 'evil' and badnmess whever you wish to find it. In my country, all our Courtrooms have a large engraved sign which hangs above the Magistrates' or Judge's bench. 'Honi soit qui mali pense!'
........... which means: Evil be, who evil thinks.

Meaning in your country you have a rule of law (courtrooms, judges, etc.), which correct me if I'm wrong, judge and punish evil actions and behaviors.

Quote: Originally posted by aCultureWarrior
Obviously you think that dead unborn babies and kids growing up without a dad in their home (who frequently turn to drugs and crime) is some kind of joke.

You posts reek with the stench of incurable and incorrigible prejudice. Open your heart and mind to objective truth.

Your turn to go back and review earlier posts of mine:

If there is something untruthful about unmarried/cohabitating couples disproportionately aborting their unborn babies, then please correct me.

http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...d-Be-Illegal&p=4764788&viewfull=1#post4764788

You see only what you want to see. You believe subjectively that all unChristian unmarried couples are evil. You believe that anybody who supports Gay Marriage must be Gay, or Gay in some way.
Your ideas about who seeks abortions are horribly subjective to your own dreadfully bigoted viewpoints.

The truth is that once you sexual anarchists took control of our laws and cultural mores', it's been nothing but disease, misery and death for those who engage in your immoral behaviors, and for society at large.

 

[annabenedetti]

I was assuming that your first and current wives were/are female; based on some of your later posts, I'm questioning that.

Considering you already knew his first wife had passed away, it's a shame you didn't keep your mouth shut for once.

Yes, I'm one of those nosy busy bodies

Yes you are.

 

[Rusha]

Looking back a couple of pages, I see that you did address that in your post to your fellow pagan and sexual anarchist Rusha.

Not accurate ... only for consenting adults.

 

[annabenedetti]

Not accurate ... only for consenting adults.

We're supposed to be a nation of Puritans, didn't you know?