?

Log in

No account? Create an account
ha. - It's made with bits of real panther. So you know it's good. [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]
pillowpants

[ website | notetoself.net ]
[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

ha. [May. 23rd, 2006|10:04 am]
pillowpants
[Tags|]

from the AFA newsletter. ... it's always a fun read. try it.

May 23, 2006

Activist Judge Strikes Down Ban On Homosexual Marriage, Overruling 76% of Georgia Voters

Dear John,

The Da Vinci Delusion - Order your copy today - $25 A liberal activist judge has struck down a constitutional amendment in Georgia which made homosexual marriage illegal! She felt that she knew better than the voters how they should vote and threw out their ballots.

The constitutional amendment, passed overwhelmingly by 76% of the voters in Georgia, is now null and void.

The homosexuals are determined to win this battle. They know they willnever win if the people have an opportunity to vote. So they areturning to liberal activist judges to force their will on the people.They intend to force homosexual marriage down the throats of Americans.They feel our children must be indoctrinated beginning in kindergartenthat homosexuality is normal behavior.

On June 6 the U.S. Senate will vote on the Marriage ProtectionAmendment (MPA) which defines marriage as being only between one manand one woman. Because of a power grab by activist judges like theone in Georgia, the MPA is the only way that the sacred institution ofmarriage will remain between one man and one woman.



and the statutory thing is funny/interesting. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/30/national/30baby.html?ex=1283054400&en=c8e2e213f11340b0&ei=5088#
LinkReply

Comments:
[User Picture]From: champion
2006-05-23 02:09 pm (UTC)
She's only an "activist" when she upholds the Constitution. Marriage isn't "sacred" considering over 50% of marriaes fail.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: potentialtoburn
2006-05-23 02:16 pm (UTC)
good point.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: champion
2006-05-25 12:25 am (UTC)
Nice to see those Poli Sci and History degrees I'm about to get came in handy ;)
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: enmascarado
2006-05-23 03:00 pm (UTC)
except to a Fundamentalist, that's reason that marriage needs more "protection", not less. These are the same people who were protesting the loosening of divorce law.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: champion
2006-05-23 03:07 pm (UTC)
They also believe a few million species of animals fit on a boat 515 feet long...
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
From: enmascarado
2006-05-23 03:23 pm (UTC)
right, but if you understand their reasoning, questionable it may be, you can better argue against/fight it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: champion
2006-05-23 03:49 pm (UTC)
I understand it. My Irish Catholic grandmother/nun couldn't answer the questions I had when I was a kid. I asked her how it was possible for someone to part water when it hasn't happened throughout the course of human history. She didn't get the gist of my question.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: androidqueen
2006-05-23 02:11 pm (UTC)
the MPA is the only way that the sacred institution ofmarriage will remain between one man and one woman.

*sigh* church and state, people! church and state! first amendment of the united states constitution! bah.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: potentialtoburn
2006-05-23 02:17 pm (UTC)
; )) ahhh.. you should've heard the speakers at the graduation ceremony for the christian school for future politicians. i wish i would have recorded it.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]From: androidqueen
2006-05-23 02:25 pm (UTC)
i suppose to be *entirely* accurate, the first amendment only literally applies to laws made by congress . . .

thank god we live in a republic and not a true democracy.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)