Polygamy Possible In Canada?

[sgallan]

As Christians, we have the right and responsibility to repeal unconstitutional laws which break down our traditional family values in this country. The majority rules!

Actually, we have a Constitution partially as a protection against the abuses of the majority. Besides, much as the Athiests and non-Christians would struggle badly in a Christian theocracy, so to would the Christian minorities such as the LDS and JW's. Those groups would be toast in a Christian theocracy. However - and this is what is cool - while Christians are the majority to be sure, not all Christians are practicing, nor are all Christians conservative. Because if they were you wouldn't have a Democratic party, the majority who also call themselves Christians.

Case in point on how far you can get with your hypothesis. Conservative Christians were all for those school board folks in Dover, Pa.. Guess what happened? Well they lost in court for one. But they didn't appeal. You know why they didn't appeal? Because other Christians voted that board and replaced them with different Christians. Y'all ain't a block vote I'm afraid.

[Outshined]

Case in point on how far you can get with your hypothesis. Conservative Christians were all for those school board folks in Dover, Pa.. Guess what happened? Well they lost in court for one. But they didn't. You know why they didn't appeal? Because other Christians voted that board and replaced them with different Christians. Y'all ain't a block vote I'm afraid.

That's because their school board has some reasonable Christians who realize that ID isn't science, and so shouldn't be a school subject.

[Snow]

Like the spread of AIDS...

As Christians, we have the right and responsibility to repeal unconstitutional laws which break down our traditional family values in this country. The majority rules!

- Mrs. A

What law is unconstitutional?

[prisonchaplain]

Like the spread of AIDS...As Christians, we have the right and responsibility to repeal unconstitutional laws which break down our traditional family values in this country. The majority rules!

Snow asks: What law is unconstitutional?

The phrasing here is EXTREMELY imprecise. My guess is that what is meant is, repealing laws that are based on what our side perceives to be a faulty reading of the Constitution (read Judicial Activism).

Let me translate this further into basic English: Repeal ROE V. WADE. That is what is really meant when most conservatives talk about 'unConstitutional rulings' 'Judicial Activism' 'Legislating from the bench' etc. What it mostly boils down to is overturning Roe v. Wade.

Some may also want to bring back school prayer, but that ain't happening. Nativity Scenes in town squares, keeping in God we trust, keeping one nation under God, etc. However, IMHO, these are all very secondary to the Roe v. Wade decision for most conservatives.

[Aristotle]

"The basis of our political systems is the right of the people to make and to alter their Constitutions of Government. But the Constitution which at any time exists, 'till changed by an explicit and authentic act of the whole people,' is sacredly obligatory upon all...If in the opinion of the People, the distribution or modification of the Constitutional powers be in any particular wrong, let it be corrected by an amendment in the way which the Constitution designates. But let there be no change by usurpation; for though this, in one instance, may be the instrument of good, it is the customary weapon by which free governments are destroyed." - George Washington

"...it is requisite...that you resist with care the spirit of innovation upon its principles, however specious the pretexts. One method of assault may be to effect, in the forms of the Constitution, alterations which will impair the energy of the system, and this to undermine what cannot be directly over-thrown." - George Washington

PROPHETS, PRINCIPLES AND NATIONAL SURVIVAL

[Snow]

Ari or Ari's husband,

Thank you for cutting and pasting George Washington.

However, the question was not whether or not you could cut and paste, the question was what law are you saying is unconstitutional?

[Aristotle]

I, Mrs. A, typed every single word...and thanks! ;-)

[Snow]

I, Mrs. A, typed every single word...and thanks! ;-)

Gee. The origianl question was not whether you could type. The question was about what law you think is unconstitutional.

What law do you think is unconstitutional?

Note: I suspect that you have no idea and were just whinning about gay marriage but are now afraid to clarify what you were complaining about because if you specified that you thought gay marriage was unconstitutional, you know that I would immediately criticize that idea as stupid and uneducated (legally speaking) and you wouldn't be able to defend the position - primarily because it isn't unconstitutional but also because you don't know much about the law anyway.

[Aristotle]

Alas! The Aristotles can not only copy paste, but they type as well. :-)

[Snow]

Alas! The Aristotles can not only copy paste, but they type as well. :-)

And you act so surprized when people treat you with disdain.

On a message board, when a reasonable and intelligent person makes an assertion, others respond to it and flesh it out. The asserter defends his or her position or provides evidence for it and through the dialogue, greater understanding is achieved.

An immature and uneducated poster makes ill-thought out assertions and avoids offering evidence or argument and resorts to immature games and avoids direct reponses.

Reasonable and intelligent posters react to such stupid and immature games by disdaining the original poster.

You make such a big deal about being a strong intelligent woman. (I assume you are a woman. I have no idea if I am talking to Ari or her Greek husband Aristotle). And yet time after time you say things that are the exact opposite of what any intelligent or reasonable person would say or do.

This is a serious question - I am not simply baiting you. The nonsense you pull is so blatant and obvious. You must know that you appear the complete fool when you represent idiocy such as Bill Clinton showing off satanic signs at his inauguration or pretending that since you once heard in Relief Society that Emma Smith was an attempted murder that it is not gossip and that she really is an attempted murderer.

Obviously, if you are intelligent, that kind of idiocy is just an act. It can't be real. While there are morons and fruitcakes that might believe that stuff, normal people do not. So - why do you pretend? What pleasure does it give you to yank people's chains by pretending to believe such idiocy?

Question for Ari's Greek Husband:

What do you think of the shennanigans? Earlier you came on the board and complained of the treatment that Ari received. You are reading her material. It must be obvious to you why people respond to her the way they do. Do you both think it is funny or what's the motivation?

[Guest Syble]

On a message board, when a reasonable and intelligent person makes an assertion, others respond to it and flesh it out. The asserter defends his or her position or provides evidence for it and through the dialogue, greater understanding is achieved.

An immature and uneducated poster makes ill-thought out assertions and avoids offering evidence or argument and resorts to immature games and avoids direct reponses.

Reasonable and intelligent posters react to such stupid and immature games by disdaining the original poster.

And without exception you have followed these rules? Do you want me to show you how well I can cut and paste all of your inane posts which did none of the above?

There are many which are nothing more than cleverly disquised (to be funny) attacks on other posters. I hope you are not a Mod. Otherwise "all hale Setheus"

[prisonchaplain]

And without exception you have followed these rules? Do you want me to show you how well I can cut and paste all of your inane posts which did none of the above?

There are many which are nothing more than cleverly disquised (to be funny) attacks on other posters. I hope you are not a Mod. Otherwise "all hale Setheus"

Hmmm...Syble is trying to take Snow to school about attack posts. She threatens to clip and paste his "inane posts." How about we look at Syble's gentle attempts at instructions--all clipped from one single string (from these you may get the impression she has a slight amount of skepticism about my Pentecostal beliefs, and would hope I'd be open to some subtle teachings) : I've bold-printed some of the more 'precious' quotes.

1. If praying and you speak in tongues, then there is an interpretor; the Holy Spirit. If there is no understanding of what you are saying, it is of the devil.

2. There is no righteous purpose in speaking tongues when no one understands what is being said. All things which cometh of God are good. Someonee speaking gibberish (which unintellible speech is) is not good and cometh not of God, but cometh of the devil.

3. If you are just saying a bunch of gibberish that not even you know what you are saying, then you are being over taken by the devil. That is just a fact. Do you find facts harsh? Sorry.

4. If you are praying in the Spirit and still don't know what you are saying~ you are possessed by the devils spirit. The Holy Ghost is a Spirit of enlightenment, not befuddlement of meaningless gibberish.

5. You are misled if you find it righteous to be speaking gibberish that the Spirit won't even allow you to understand what you are saying.

6. I guarantee you, that if you don't even know or are not given to know what you are saying through the Spirit, you are being led by the devil.

6. If you don't UNDERSTAND or are not given a INTERPRETQTION, you have nothing. Nothing is what you get from the Devil.

7. If you insist that people blubbering gibberish in a spiritual frendzy is the Holy Ghost, then why are we taught in many scriptures that the Holy Ghost gives the diversity of gifts that ALL might be edified. Everything the Father gives us in the way of gifts are to serve others.

8. You need a reference on this one too? I thought you were a chaplain? It is the basic principles of everything Christ taught -- those who lose their life for my name sake etc. Why would you think that this thing would be used for strictly selfish reasons on such a regular basis and not be from the devil?

9. What you are experiencing is deceit from the lower quadrant. It is not of the Lord because it is not truth, light, intelligence, which is His love and giving of Himself which is love. (1 John 2 ; 1 John 4:7-8) These you should already know.

10. what you are experiencing is keeping you satisfied on a very low level of spiritual obtainment. That would be the work of the devil.

11. I am praying for you out of the Love of Christ that you will not be over taken in your pride of dead works.

12. I think a little understanding of what dead works are would be in order as well.

13. I see nothing coming from unintelligle yammer that gives no messages, no teachings, no truths. What more are these experiences than the glory the Pharasees heaped upon themselves for fasting, and praying in public.

14. Dead works are a facade of the righteous gifts and I abhore them. The Holy Ghost only gives good gifts. A pretension of a gift in an incompleted form does not edify. If you choose this form, so be it. It is for you to choose.

15. Why you wouldn't want a purer form of praying to the Father than having this intervention happen is a mystery to me. (I stand by my first conclusions, if not even more strongly, after reading your continued defense and discription.) It seems to me as a form of seeking for a sign and only a wicked and adultrous generation seeks for such.

16. I see no humility in your posts, so I would assume you haven't the humility required for such a thing as the gift of tongues and you are being grossly deceived.

[Guest Monica]

What would be the maximun ammount of spouces permitted?

[Guest T'Pau]

This is a Christian nation. Christians represent the majority in this country. Perhaps it's time for Christians to take a stand and fight for their rights before they lose their country to heathens.

Hmm, don't think I'd ever call anyone a heathen.

And actually the US is a multi-cultural nation. As is Canada. :)

[Fiannan]

What would be the maximun ammount of spouces permitted?

Actually, Islam is the only one of the Abrahamic religions that limits the number of wives a man can have (that being 4). Judaism does not nor does Christianity. Leading rabbinical leaders in Europe suspended (not ended, suspended) polygamy a few hundred years ago in order to not get persecuted by Christians. Sephardic Jews in Arab lands still practice polygamy. Roman Pagan society was one in which a man could only have one "legal" wife whose children were in line for property inheritance -- but it was pretty much expected that he would have mistresses as well as slave girls in relationships. Christianity rejected Biblical family patterns and adopted Roman attitudes on marriage long after the ministry of Jesus, although the slave girl thing was kinda forgotten.