Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Parenting
ParentingMothersSingle ParentsStep ParentsAdoptionTwinsSpankingChildren's Health
Pregnancy
PregnancyBreastfeeding
Marriage
MarriageDivorce
FamilyKB.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Family Forum / Parenting / Adoption / May 2006



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Catholics face moral dilemma over gay adoption

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Sheri - 15 Mar 2006 01:09 GMT
Catholics face moral dilemma over gay adoption
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060313/us_nm/religion_usa_dc_1

By Jason Szep Mon Mar 13, 6:04 PM ET

BOSTON (Reuters) - U.S. Catholics, already divided over the

Vatican's ban on homosexuals in seminaries, could soon face another
polarizing question: should Catholic charities stand together against gay
adoption?

The Boston Archdiocese's Catholic Charities' decision on Friday to end its
century-old adoption service rather than comply with state law allowing gays
to adopt children is fueling debate in Massachusetts, a state that is both a
bastion of Catholicism and a trailblazer in gay rights.

San Francisco's Catholic Archdiocese said on Monday it was also reviewing
its practice of allowing gay adoption through its social service agency
after receiving an e-mail opposing it from a former archbishop, who is now a
top Vatican official.

A tough stand on gay adoption, while sure to rally traditionalists for
upholding Vatican teachings, could alienate liberal Catholics and further
choke funding at a time when many U.S. dioceses are under financial stress
from declining attendance and multimillion-dollar lawsuits in sex-abuse
scandals, religious scholars say.

It adds to the list of sensitive issues -- from abortion to stem-cell
research and emergency contraception -- separating reformers and
conservatives among America's 65 million Catholics.

"For some Catholics, this position on gay adoption will be disconcerting.
But for those seeking a more conservative path, it will be a good thing,"
said Chester Gillis, chair of the theology department at Georgetown
University.

"For those who take their cues from American society, American laws and so
forth, they will be uncomfortable with this. They will be forced in some way
to choose between their church and their country or their state."

STRUGGLE FOR MORAL AUTHORITY

It is unclear whether other Catholic charities will follow the lead of the
Boston Archdiocese's social services arm, which handles 31 percent of
adoptions in the state.

California, Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon,
Vermont and the District of Columbia allow same-sex couples to jointly
petition to adopt children, along with Massachusetts, whose lawmakers have
been at odds with Catholic leaders since it legalized gay marriage in 2004.

In Boston, the announcement was seen by some as a sign of renewal in
Boston's Archdiocese, which has struggled to regain moral authority after a
pedophile priest scandal in 2002 forced the nation's fourth-largest diocese
to shut more than 60 churches to raise money.

"It's a sign of the strength of the archdiocese and its remarkable strength
in spite of the fact that it has gone through two major crises -- one over
clerical sexual abuse and the second over the closing of the parishes in
Boston," said Stephen Pope, a theology professor at Boston College.

In December, Catholic Charities' 42-member board voted unanimously in
support of same-sex adoptions. The about-face came after eight board members
abruptly resigned following efforts by the state's four bishops to ban
Catholic social service agencies from conducting adoptions by gay couples.

"Does this reflect the Catholic Church's ability to impose itself on all its
constituent parts, well to a certain extent yes, given the board's
position," said Nancy Ammerman, professor of sociology and religion at
Boston University.

The end of Boston's 103-year-old Catholic Charities' founding mission of
finding homes for troubled children comes amid a Vatican campaign against
homosexuality, including a ban imposed in November on most gays from
entering seminaries.

In 2003,  Pope Benedict, when he was still Cardinal Ratzinger, issued a
stern document that said allowing children to be adopted by same-sex couples
"would actually mean doing violence to these children" and was "gravely
immoral."

Catholic scholars said a question for Boston Archbishop Sean O'Malley, who
was recently elevated to cardinal, is whether the appeal to conservative
Catholics will jeopardize millions of dollars in donations at a time when
the Boston Archdiocese faces a $93 million bill to settle sex-abuse cases.

"They may lose some private funding," said Pope.
wendy - 15 Mar 2006 01:52 GMT
Why is the gov't telling the church what to do in the first place? I thought
there was a separation between church and state? Or did I miss a memo?

If Catholic Charities doesn't want homosexuals adopting, who cares? Why
should the gov't be able to tell them what to do?

Don't get me wrong, I think homosexuals should have the same rights as
anyone else. They should be able to get married and adopt children. My point
is that the gov't should keep out of it.

Why would homosexuals want to adopt from an institution that is vehemently
opposed to their way of life anyway?

Being a lapsed Catholic, I find the religion and most of it's followers to
be terribly hypocritical. Do as I say, not as I do type of thing.

Wendy

> Catholics face moral dilemma over gay adoption
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060313/us_nm/religion_usa_dc_1
[quoted text clipped - 86 lines]
>
> "They may lose some private funding," said Pope.
no@none.com - 15 Mar 2006 03:16 GMT
>Why is the gov't telling the church what to do in the first place? I thought
>there was a separation between church and state? Or did I miss a memo?

As simple as possible:

Government regulates adoption.  

Church decides to get involved.  

Government has standards.  

Standards include equal protection under the law applying to gay
couples seeking to indoctrinate young peo ....   er .... I mean,
adopt.  Gay couples seeking to adopt.  

Church treated like anyone else.

>If Catholic Charities doesn't want homosexuals adopting, who cares? Why
>should the gov't be able to tell them what to do?

What if they don't want blacks adopting?  Not that I don't like blacks
or anything ...
Buttahflie - 15 Mar 2006 09:31 GMT
My question here is: If everyone knows that the Catholic church is
against homosexual relationships in the first place, why is anyone
surprised that they're now against homosexuals adopting? Whether the
government is involved or not. Just wondering...
Sheri - 15 Mar 2006 14:05 GMT
Not surprised.

> My question here is: If everyone knows that the Catholic church is
> against homosexual relationships in the first place, why is anyone
> surprised that they're now against homosexuals adopting? Whether the
> government is involved or not. Just wondering...
Dragon's Girl - 15 Mar 2006 15:28 GMT
I'm not surprised they are against it, but very surprised that they decided
to completely stop adoptions based on the gay family law.
It really doesn't seem to make any sense.
I guess it's like setting your house on fire because your neighbor is gay
and the law says you can't make THEM move.

Betty

> My question here is: If everyone knows that the Catholic church is
> against homosexual relationships in the first place, why is anyone
> surprised that they're now against homosexuals adopting? Whether the
> government is involved or not. Just wondering...
Sheri - 15 Mar 2006 23:52 GMT
What? My neighbor is gay? Dangit....let me go get some firewood!
HA HA HA

> I guess it's like setting your house on fire because your neighbor is gay
wendy - 15 Mar 2006 22:41 GMT
> My question here is: If everyone knows that the Catholic church is
> against homosexual relationships in the first place, why is anyone
> surprised that they're now against homosexuals adopting? Whether the
> government is involved or not. Just wondering...

Good question. I'm not at all surprised. I'm also wondering how many
homosexual couples out there actually WANT to adopt from the Catholic
Church. Since their lifestyle is considered by the church to be an
abomination. Funny how they take that stand, yet there have been so many
priests accused of molesting altar boys. Can you say hypocritical?
Sheri - 15 Mar 2006 23:53 GMT
Hypocritical.  There...I said it.

> Good question. I'm not at all surprised. I'm also wondering how many
> homosexual couples out there actually WANT to adopt from the Catholic
> Church. Since their lifestyle is considered by the church to be an
> abomination. Funny how they take that stand, yet there have been so many
> priests accused of molesting altar boys. Can you say hypocritical?
wendy - 16 Mar 2006 00:06 GMT
LOL

> Hypocritical.  There...I said it.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>> abomination. Funny how they take that stand, yet there have been so many
>> priests accused of molesting altar boys. Can you say hypocritical?
no@none.com - 16 Mar 2006 18:24 GMT
Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.

>Hypocritical.  There...I said it.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>> abomination. Funny how they take that stand, yet there have been so many
>> priests accused of molesting altar boys. Can you say hypocritical?
Sheri - 16 Mar 2006 21:50 GMT
And just how do you know that I did not verbalize it when I typed it?
HA HA HA

> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
no@none.com - 17 Mar 2006 03:09 GMT
I merely assumed that you don't suffer from the disease talking to
one's self in a empty room syndrome alone.  Alexander Hamilton did
that.

>And just how do you know that I did not verbalize it when I typed it?
>HA HA HA
>
>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
Sheri - 17 Mar 2006 03:16 GMT
I wasn't talking to myself.....I am surrounded by family who were all
conversing about the posts, and I simply VERBALIZED what I was writing in
response.

>I merely assumed that you don't suffer from the disease talking to
> one's self in a empty room syndrome alone.  Alexander Hamilton did
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>>
>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
Jim Richardson - 21 Mar 2006 08:34 GMT
Seems the Queers get all the attention here on ASCPS. Can't get a link to
help families, but mention some FAGS trying to get access to boys and
suddenly the happy people come out of the woodwork.

Sheesh...nobody gives a sh.t that the USA is fast becoming the USSA, but
mention Fags and the happy people come out of the woodwork.

What would Fags want with vunerable children anyway? Their lifestyle choice
does not offer the possibility of children So they whine to get our kids to
pork.

Hump - seems every newsgroup I visit has it's resident Fag cheerleader
squad. Especially any group with child or kids involved.

>I wasn't talking to myself.....I am surrounded by family who were all
>conversing about the posts, and I simply VERBALIZED what I was writing in
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>>>
>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
robert99@post.com - 21 Mar 2006 12:50 GMT
Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:

http://www.fides.org/eng/news/2005/0505/25_4993.html

Homosexuality and children http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA03I35

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4145251,00.html
Jim Richardson - 21 Mar 2006 14:37 GMT
> Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
> by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4145251,00.html

Yeah Rob - Kids raised by fags do just fine
Fag propaganda by fags - for fags.
Man boy love is a cornerstone of faggetry.

I'll spare you the recent Illinois study that found Fags molest foster and
adoptive children at rates that would spin your cap.

Fags suffer from sexual perversions that repulse most folk - they dream and
write and speak constantly of butfuc*ing boys - Fags olderthan 30 ae called
'trolls' - fag rejects - the dead and dying.

Gather round boys, da fags wanna be yo daddy.
0:-> - 21 Mar 2006 18:11 GMT
>> Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
>> by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Fag propaganda by fags - for fags.
> Man boy love is a cornerstone of faggetry.

What does that mean?

> I'll spare you the recent Illinois study that found Fags molest foster and
> adoptive children at rates that would spin your cap.

No, go right ahead and post them.

> Fags suffer from sexual perversions that repulse most folk -

All practices that homosexuals engage in are performed by heterosexuals
commonly.

> they dream and
> write and speak constantly of butfuc*ing boys -

Child molesters may, but homosexuals do not.

> Fags olderthan 30 ae called
> 'trolls' - fag rejects - the dead and dying.
>
> Gather round boys, da fags wanna be yo daddy.

I've never heard of some of your claims above. You seem to be very
intimate in matters of child molestation and the practitioners. Why is
that I wonder?

0:->

Signature

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Jim Richardson - 21 Mar 2006 21:33 GMT
>>> Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
>>> by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> intimate in matters of child molestation and the practitioners. Why is
> that I wonder?

I'm a recovering faggot, I used to hang in the bars where we'd carry on like
an adolesent girls while we waited for the recruiters to deliver the
chickens. You know the lingo dinkhead. You should - the issue hits close to
home - huh homoboy??

> 0:->
0:-> - 22 Mar 2006 00:46 GMT
>>>> Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
>>>> by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:
[quoted text clipped - 32 lines]
> chickens. You know the lingo dinkhead. You should - the issue hits close to
> home - huh homoboy??

Your proof that I'm a homosexual would be...?

I know literally thousands of homosexuals, male and female. Not a one a
child molester to my knowledge. Many who have adopted children others
did not even want.. and vastly improved their lives. Some children that
disrupted from straight homes, but with two strong male models in their
lives managed to get it together.

One example of many.

You aren't a recovering faggot. You are a recovering paedophile.

Quite a difference.

0:->

>> 0:->

Signature

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

wendy - 23 Mar 2006 13:29 GMT
You know what, "Jim"? You need to get yourself, as quickly as possible, to
the nearest shrink.
Your weird fascination with this subject is giving me the willies.

>> Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
>> by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Gather round boys, da fags wanna be yo daddy.
Jim Richardson - 21 Mar 2006 14:47 GMT
As you can tell, Rob, I didn't check your links before I replied - I'm so
used to being swarmed by the Fag patrol that it didn't even dawn on me you
might be on the up and up.

Thanks for those links - (like it takes a study to figure a kid raised by
fags is gonna be one messed up individual) - now that theres proof
positive - maybe the USA will stop sacrificing our children on the alter of
Fagdom.

> Spanish report on infantile development in same sex couples, compiled
> by Hazte Oir of Spain and published on a few sites including here:
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4145251,00.html
Dragon's Girl - 31 Mar 2006 18:04 GMT
If we follow Jim's assertions that gays aren't fit to raise kids, then we
come to quite a sticky issue:  how WILL we protect gay BIO parents from
abuse by the state????

Jim wants parents to have rights and the state to step out.
But Jim also doesn't want gays raising kids because they are unfit.

I guess that means that, by Jim's standards, DFS should use homosexuality as
grounds for removal of children.

It makes so much sense to add in yet another reason to remove kids from
their homes, doesn't it?

See how smart Jim is?

Jim, like many of the other 'family rights' people, doesn't take the time to
think through the future consequences of their immature reasoning.

If we deny gays the right to adopt, and the right to foster, then,
eventually, someone is going to use that as undeniable proof that their ex
wife, or ex husband is unfit to raise their child(ren) (after all, it will
be law, you know), and then the department of family services will join in
and start removing kids on those grounds, and then there will be ONE MORE
reason to take a kid from their home based on abso-f.cking-lutely NOTHING.

Thanks Jim, families need more supporters like you.

> As you can tell, Rob, I didn't check your links before I replied - I'm so
> used to being swarmed by the Fag patrol that it didn't even dawn on me you
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>>
>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4145251,00.html
Jim Richardson - 31 Mar 2006 21:16 GMT
> If we follow Jim's assertions that gays aren't fit to raise kids, then we
> come to quite a sticky issue:  how WILL we protect gay BIO parents from
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>
> Thanks Jim, families need more supporters like you.

Ucking monkeys on a typewriter make more sense than you caseworker - you're
hilarious, delerious, and utterly worthless. Suicide is painless.

>> As you can tell, Rob, I didn't check your links before I replied - I'm so
>> used to being swarmed by the Fag patrol that it didn't even dawn on me
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>>>
>>> http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4145251,00.html
Sheri - 21 Mar 2006 15:05 GMT
Please don't mistake me for a faggot cheerleader....I just post the stories
that are shared with me that pertain to adoption.

Warm regards,
Sheri

> Seems the Queers get all the attention here on ASCPS. Can't get a link to
> help families, but mention some FAGS trying to get access to boys and
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>>>>
>>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
Jim Richardson - 21 Mar 2006 15:35 GMT
> Please don't mistake me for a faggot cheerleader....I just post the
> stories that are shared with me that pertain to adoption.
>
> Warm regards,
> Sheri

No - I see you're just posting about adoption. I was talking about
newsgroups generally - forces that be have long ago shut off discussion on
usenet - You're with us or against us - there's only one view left - who
needs discussion?

But,  you'd think homos would be the last ones to adopt government
propaganda tactics - seeing they're about to be dealt with by the Bushies.

>> Seems the Queers get all the attention here on ASCPS. Can't get a link to
>> help families, but mention some FAGS trying to get access to boys and
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
midwestwoman - 21 Mar 2006 23:20 GMT
I think the Catholic Church is having a moral dilemma over it's own
shortcomings, failures, and abuses of grand delusions.  Gay adoptions
should be the least of their concerns right now.  My advice to the
church: "Clean your own house and take your own inventory before you
start in on anyone else.  Karma has finally caught up to you and you
are getting what you deserve."

Carla

"http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11896692/from/ET/

BOSTON (AP) -- Massachusetts, one of the most Catholic states in the
country, is witnessing an ever-widening rift between church and state
on a raft of social issues, from gay marriage and abortion "buffer
zones" to stem cell research and emergency contraception.

The schisms reveal the once mighty political clout of the Catholic
Church in Massachusetts is in a state of flux. Large numbers of state
lawmakers still identify themselves as Catholic but are picking and
choosing when to side with the church, and when to break with it.

The recent decision of Catholic Charities, the Boston Archdiocese's
social service agency, to end its century-old adoption program rather
than comply with state law barring discrimination against gays is just
the latest fissure.

Part of the church's declining clout may be the clash between its
strict moral views and the messy business of politics, observers say.

"When the church has a position, it tends to be categorical," said
Tufts University political science professor Jeffrey Berry. "Lawmakers
want their interest groups to take half a loaf and the church isn't
eager to bargain. They want it their way."
Glory2Jesus@ArmyofGod.com - 08 Apr 2006 16:12 GMT
Homosexual adoption is child abuse. Putting innocent children with
sexual deviants should be against the law and those trying to do so
should be punished.

Whatever you think, you will not be able to change God's Word regarding
homosexuality and will one day have to pay the price for not believing
what God has written.

Leviticus 18:22 Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it
is abomination.

Leviticus 20:13 If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a
woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be
put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

Romans 1:22-27

V22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, V23 And
changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to
corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping
things.

V24 Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of
their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

V25 Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served
the creature more than the Creator, Who is blessed for ever. Amen.

V26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even
their women did change the natural use into that which is against
nature:

V27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman,
burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that
which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their
error which was meet.

1 Timothy 1:8-10

V8 But we know that the law is good, if a man use it lawfully;

V9 Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for
the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for
unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers,
for manslayers,

V10 For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for
menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other
thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;

1 Corinthians 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit
the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor
idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves
with mankind

SAY THIS PRAYER: Dear Jesus, I am a sinner and am headed to eternal
hell because of my sins. I believe you died on the cross to take away
my sins and to take me to heaven. Jesus, I ask you now to come into my
heart and take away my sins and give me eternal life.
http://www.armyofgod.com/Leviticus.html
Greegor - 08 Apr 2006 18:28 GMT
Carla midwestwoman wrote
> "Clean your own house and take your own inventory
> before you start in on anyone else."

That's my position on the disgraceful Child Protection
agencies.  They try to sit in judgement of parents for
trivia when government is without a doubt, THE WORST
parent possible!

Iowa DHS had a disabled boy getting enema treatments
several times a day in a DHS run facility in Cherokee Iowa,
as punishment.  Any moron knows it was child abuse,
but DHS got to investigate itself, and decided that it was
not child abuse.   If a PARENT had allowed such treatment
they would have been put in prison for "Failure to Protect".

I'm not in favor of gay/lesbian adoption, but
considering the problems the Catholic Church has had
of late, with child sexual abuse and coverups, WHY
would anybody respect CATHOLIC CHURCH comments
about child protection issues of any sort??

Neither the Catholic Church nor Child Protection
agencies are without sin, yet they cast the first stone.

Both live in glass houses.
jack102@mail.com - 01 May 2006 11:20 GMT
http://home.pacbell.net/perozich/Creating_Gay_Children.html
0:-> - 21 Mar 2006 18:07 GMT
> Seems the Queers get all the attention here on ASCPS.

It would not seem that way to you if you were not fixated on the issue.

> Can't get a link to
> help families,

I'm trying to recall when I've seen you post any. I've posted hundreds
over the years, maybe even thousands of times. Others have as well from
all sides of the issue of child protection. I applaud even my opponents
doing so.

> but mention some FAGS trying to get access to boys and
> suddenly the happy people come out of the woodwork.

How is someone that insists on the truth about homosexuals and children
"happy people?"

> Sheesh...nobody gives a sh.t that the USA is fast becoming the USSA, but
> mention Fags and the happy people come out of the woodwork.

You are a victim of propaganda.

> What would Fags want with vunerable children anyway?

Those that foster do so for the same reason heterosexual people do; to
provide safety and a home and family to the child.

Those that adopt do so for the same reasons heterosexual people adopt.

> Their lifestyle choice
> does not offer the possibility of children

Really? I know many lesbians who have given birth, and others, male and
females who have adopted. That's also how many heterosexual people get
children in their family as well.

> So they whine to get our kids to
> pork.

What would heterosexual people want with children if the person is a
child molester?

> Hump - seems every newsgroup I visit has it's resident Fag cheerleader
> squad. Especially any group with child or kids involved.

The facts are that homosexuals are no more prone to sexually abuse
children than heterosexuals.

You are making quite a fool of yourself.

0:->

>> I wasn't talking to myself.....I am surrounded by family who were all
>> conversing about the posts, and I simply VERBALIZED what I was writing in
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>>>>
>>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.

Signature

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Jim Richardson - 21 Mar 2006 21:36 GMT
Kane - you should get the facts before cheerleading for buttfuckers.

http://www.fides.org/eng/news/2005/0505/25_4993.html

Homosexuality and children http://www.frc.org/get.cfm?i=WA03I35

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4145251,00.html

>> Seems the Queers get all the attention here on ASCPS.
>
[quoted text clipped - 60 lines]
>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
0:-> - 22 Mar 2006 00:48 GMT
> Kane - you should get the facts before cheerleading for buttfuckers.

Jimmy, you should not cherry pick yours before condemning decent people.

0:->

> http://www.fides.org/eng/news/2005/0505/25_4993.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 58 lines]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.

Signature

"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what
to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb
contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin

Dragon's Girl - 31 Mar 2006 18:06 GMT
> Kane - you should get the facts before cheerleading for buttfuckers.

Jim, you should get the facts before you start cheerleading for further
reducing the rights of families to further your own agenda.

> http://www.fides.org/eng/news/2005/0505/25_4993.html
>
[quoted text clipped - 66 lines]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Actually, you stated it.  You didn't say it.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2010 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.