tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.comments2023-04-02T04:18:35.312-05:00The Whole ArmorOne Manhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comBlogger120125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-74778807870479366242017-06-29T10:16:32.820-05:002017-06-29T10:16:32.820-05:00Please pray frankly for all passengers by car, bus...Please pray frankly for all passengers by car, bus, train, and airplane (and small plane) around the world, that accidents (in our imperfect world) may be prevented by the GRACE OF GOD, and that THE TRAVELERS PRAY FOR SAFETY and KEEP BELIEVING THAT GOD LOVES US AND THAT HE RESPONDS TO EACH PRAY-ER. And please pray for all angels and babies, that in their innocence they receive fulfillment from the faithful, the CHRIST followers, the believers, and the chosen here in this sinful world. That these above can receive a blessing in Saint John Paul II and Saint Peter. Prepare and Rejoice to request for the BLESSINGS AND GRACE of the HOLY SPIRIT, for the RISEN ONE IS COMING SOON. REMEMBER BROTHERS AND SISTERS THAT JESUS' BOUNTY for US is PEACE, and HIS BURDEN is LIGHT.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-37791425450069693782014-12-18T02:00:48.615-06:002014-12-18T02:00:48.615-06:00I want to testify of the good work of Dr okhore wh...I want to testify of the good work of Dr okhore who helped me in achieving the thing i never thought i was going to have again.My name is rose i was in a relationship for 3yrs with a boy i believed he loved me so much. At a time he started nagging over every little thing i do so i knew something was wrong i tried more than anything in the world to persuade him after a while i noticed some changes in him, i tried to do things dat will please him in several ways but all to no avail.shortly i noticed he was seeing another girl i tried to make him understand that i loved him so much but he wouldn’t even listen.one day i read a testimony on a similar case a person testified of the work of this great Dr okhore even when i did not believe i was convinced by my friend so i contacted him and tried his method reluctantly, surprisingly in less than one week my lover contacted me and till date we are still together happily married with two kids.so if you are going through a similar thing or you have a problem just contact him i guarantee you he will help you. here is his email:okhoretemple@gmail.com.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00393251863114333590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-14130113020105823742014-07-25T16:43:21.189-05:002014-07-25T16:43:21.189-05:00Are you *currently* being sent into Hell forever ....Are you *currently* being sent into Hell forever ... automatically excommunicated (outside) of God’s Catholic Church ?<br /><br />Answer: Yes you are ... you can reverse it ... please continue.<br /><br />Council of Florence, Session 8, 22 Nov 1439 -- infallible Source of Dogma > <br />"Whoever wills to be saved, before all things it is necessary that he holds the Catholic faith. Unless a person keeps this faith whole and undefiled, without doubt he shall perish eternally."<br /><br />You must believe the Catholic Dogma to be in the Church ... Dogma you have *never* seen.<br /><br />Site > Immaculata-one.com ... infallible Dogma throughout.<br /><br />The Mass is *not* the Faith ... The *Dogma* is the Faith.<br />The Mass is *not* the Faith ... The *Dogma* is the Faith.<br />The Mass is *not* the Faith ... The *Dogma* is the Faith.<br /><br />Yes ... you have been *profoundly* deceived.<br /><br />The Catholic Faith *is not* Bible interpretation ... it is the Catholic infallible Sources of Dogma (of the Pope in union with the Bishops of the world). The Catholic Church didn’t even define the Bible’s New Testament Canon until 397 A.D. at the Council of Carthage.<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - -<br /><br />Can a group which enforces the opposite, the opposite, and the opposite of the Catholic unchangeable Dogma be the Catholic Church?<br /><br />No, it cannot possibly be the Catholic Church ... and promotion of the opposite of the Catholic Dogma is exactly what the vatican-2 heretic cult does ... and has been doing since it’s founding on 8 December 1965 at the Vatican.<br /><br />The vatican-2 heresy does not have the Office of the Papacy ... only the Catholic Church has the Papacy. <br /><br />The Dogma cannot “change” or be “reversed” ... God does not “change”. <br /> <br />The founding documents of the vatican-2 heretic cult … the “vatican-2 council” documents … have well over 200 heresies *against* prior defined unchangeable Dogma. Every (apparent) bishop at the “council” approved the mountain of heresy, which caused their automatic excommunication, see Section 13.2 of Immaculata-one.com. <br /><br />- - - - - - - - - -<br /><br />Section 12 > Anti-Christ vatican-2 heresies (50 listed) ... followed by many Catholic corrections.<br /><br />Sections 13 and 13.1 > Photographic *proof* of heresy at the Vatican.<br /><br />Because of … the Catholic Dogma on automatic excommunication for heresy or for physical participation in a heretic cult (such as the v-2 cult) …<br /><br />… we were all placed, body and soul, *outside* of Christianity (the Catholic Church) on 8 December 1965 … the close date of the “council”.<br /><br />Section 13.2 > Catholic Dogma on automatic excommunication for heresy or participating in a heretic cult such as ... vatican-2, lutheran, methodist, evangelical, etc.<br /><br />Section 13.3 > Matt 16:18, Gates of Hell scripture ... is *not* about the Office of the Papacy.<br /><br />Section 13.4 > The vatican-2 heretic cult does not have the Office of the Papacy only the Catholic Church has the Papacy.<br /><br />Section 13.6 > The Catholic Dogma on Jurisdiction and Automatic Excommunication for heresy define that ... God has allowed Catholic Jurisdiction ... for Mass and Confession to disappear from the world. There is no such thing as Catholic Mass outside of the Catholic Church. <br /><br />Non-Catholic heresies such as “vatican-2”, “sspx”, “sspv”, “cmri”, etc. ... do not have Catholic Mass.<br /><br />Section 19.1 > Dogma on Abjuration for *re-entering* Christianity (the Catholic Church) … after being automatically excommunicated.<br /><br />Section 10.2 > Returning to a state of grace, in places and times when Confession is not available, like now.<br /><br />- - - - - - - - - -<br /><br />Second Council of Constantinople, 553 A.D. -- infallible Source of Dogma > <br />"The heretic, even though he has not been condemned formally by any individual, in reality brings anathema on himself, having cut himself off from the way of truth by his heresy."<br /><br />Blessed John Eudes, died 1680 ><br />“The greatest evil existing today is heresy, an infernal rage which hurls countless souls into eternal damnation.”<br /><br />Everything you must know, believe, and do to get to Heaven is on > > Immaculata-one.com.<br /><br />Mike<br />Our Lady of Conquest<br />Pray for us<br />Mikehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16461431542126250213noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-54137372215129867982014-07-25T09:35:29.464-05:002014-07-25T09:35:29.464-05:00BE CAREFUL HERE NOBODY CAN HELP YOU HERE OR EVEN S...BE CAREFUL HERE NOBODY CAN HELP YOU HERE OR EVEN SUGGEST HOW YOU CAN GET YOUR EX OR LOVE BACK,ANY TESTIMONIES OF MOST SPELL CASTER HERE MUST BE IGNORE.BECAUSE MOST OF THEM ARE SCAM I MEAN REAL SCAM WHICH I WAS A VICTIM AND I GOT RIPPED OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS BECAUSE I WAS SO ANXIOUS TO GET MY WIFE BACK AFTER SHE LEFT ME FOR OVER 2 YEARS WITH MY 7 YEARS OLD SON JERRY,I HAVE APPLIED TO 7 DIFFERENT SPELL CASTER HERE AND ALL TO NO AVAIL THEY ALL ASK FOR SAME THING SEND YOUR NAME YOUR EX NAME ADDRESS AND PICTURE PHONE NUMBER ETC WHICH I DID OVER AND OVER AGAIN AND MOST OF THEM WERE FROM WEST AFRICA UNTIL ISAW A POST ABOUT MAMA ANITA SPELL AND I DECIDED TO GAVE HER MY LAST TRAIL.SHE ASK ME FOUR THINGS MY REAL NAME,MY EX AND MY EX MOTHER NAME AND $180 AND SAID MY EX WILL COME BACK IN 24HOURS, I HAVE PAID OVER $3000 ON SPELL CASTING AND COURIER AND NOTHING HAVE WORK FOR ME AFTER 3 DAYS I WAS THINKING ABOUT HOW MUCH I HAVE LOST SO FAR SO I SAID LET ME GIVE HER A TRY SO I CALLED HER AGAIN AND SEND MY REAL NAME,MY EX AND MY EX MOTHER NAME AND THE $180 BECAUSE I SWEAR IT WAS MY LAST TRY SO I WAS WAITING AS SHE TOLD ME TO WAIT TILL NEXT DAY AND I COULD NOT SLEEP THAT NIGHT BECAUSE I REALLY LOVE MY WIFE AND WANT HER BACK AT 9PM THAT DAY I SAW MY WIFE ON LINE ON FACE BOOK AND SHE SAID HI AT FIRST I WAS SHOCK BECAUSE SHE NEVER TALK WITH ME FOR THE PAST A YEAR AND 9 MONTH NOW I DID NOT REPLY AGAIN SHE SAID ARE YOU THERE? I QUICKLY REPLY YES AND SHE SAID CAN WE SEE TOMORROW I SAID YES AND SHE WENT OFF-LINE I WAS CONFUSED I TRY TO CHAT HER AGAIN BUT SHE WAS NO MORE ON LINE I COULD NOT SLEEP THAT NIGHT AS I WAS WONDERING WHAT SHE IS GOING TO SAY, BY 7.AM THE NEXT MORNING SHE GAVE ME A MISS CALL I DECIDED NOT TO CALL BACK AS I WAS STILL ON SHOCK AGAIN SHE CALL AND I PICK SHE SAID CAN WE SEE AFTER WORK TODAY I SAID YES SO SHE END THE CALL IMMEDIATELY I GOT OFF WORK SHE CALL ME AND WE MEET AND NOW WE ARE BACK AGAIN I CALL MAMA ANITA THE NEXT DAY THANKING HER FOR WHAT SHE HAS DONE IN FACT I STILL CALL HER AND THANK HER AS MY LIFE WAS NOT COMPLETE WITHOUT MY WIFE PLEASE BE CAREFUL HERE I HAVE BEEN SCAM THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IF YOU WANT A TRUE LOVE SPELL THEN CONTACT MAMA ANITA (mama.anitatruelovespell@gmail.com)Alexnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-92056847153847651002013-06-17T14:21:55.809-05:002013-06-17T14:21:55.809-05:00Wonderful goods from you, man. I've understand...Wonderful goods from you, man. I've understand your stuff previous to and you're just extremely excellent.<br /><br />I actually like what you have acquired here, certainly like what you are stating and the way in which you say it.<br />You make it enjoyable and you still take care of to keep it smart.<br />I cant wait to read much more from you. This is <br />actually a tremendous site.<br /><br />My website <a href="http://buyidollips.beep.com" rel="nofollow">idol lip</a>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-40084732474289787602012-06-08T15:22:23.611-05:002012-06-08T15:22:23.611-05:00See today's Wall Street Jounal article linked ...See today's Wall Street Jounal article linked below. Specifically, " just-war theory should broaden, rather than limit, the use of force against terrorists. The work of the Catholic theologians (Aquinas and Augustine) drew upon traditions stretching back to the ancient world that would have considered terrorists to be hostis humani generis, the enemy of all mankind, who merited virtually no protections under the laws of war."<br /><br />http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303665904577452271794312802.html?mod=googlenews_wsjBill dad of eightnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-89984407992314639772012-06-04T14:31:02.317-05:002012-06-04T14:31:02.317-05:00yes, serious questions of prudence. yes, you may u...yes, serious questions of prudence. yes, you may use the exchange. I would also suggest your consulting Lutheran Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Claus Philipp Maria Schenk Graf von Stauffenberg (a good Catholic boy) as examples of ordinary people (vs state officials) taking (or attempting to take) pre-emptive strikes. In their cases too, the responder was not the focus of the aggressor. But millions of others died.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-8147133076791656132012-05-28T14:50:38.987-05:002012-05-28T14:50:38.987-05:00Thanks for sharing the Weigel piece. He does make...Thanks for sharing the Weigel piece. He does make an interesting proposition, that "aggression underway" does not necessarily have to mean "underway against the responder." Though I would tend to agree that there are grave injustices--including genocide--that deserve our attention, as he mentioned, "there are serious questions of prudence to be addressed." Those questions, including the consideration of blowback, don't even seem to be a serious part of the political discourse.<br /><br />On a separate note, would you mind if I use our exchange here as kicking-off point for that post (possible series) on Just War?One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-57970416371084901642012-05-25T23:16:49.392-05:002012-05-25T23:16:49.392-05:00Just Cause
Traditionally, there are three things t...Just Cause<br />Traditionally, there are three things that are just according to classical just war theory: to fight against evil, to recapture something which is unjustly taken, or as an act of defense. If the aggression is sure to take place, surly in this day and age it would be ludicrous (and damnable to he whose duty it is to act) to wait for the aggression to occur - and then strike back - after harm is done. However, determining with accuracy wether the aggressor will strike is difficult. I cannot do the subject justice so I will let George Weigel do it:<br /><br />Pre-emption, Just War and the Defense of World Order<br /><br />ZENIT: Much of the opposition against U.S. military action centers on worries about endorsing the concept of a pre-emptive strike. What does Catholic moral teaching have to say on this matter? <br /><br />Weigel: As the classic just-war tradition evolved over the centuries, three situations satisfied the criteria of "just cause": defense against an aggression under way, recovery of something wrongfully taken, and/or punishment for evil. <br /><br />Modern just-war thinking, which is reflected in articles 2 and 51 of the U.N. Charter, has tended to limit "just cause" to "defense against an aggression under way." But we should note that the idea of a moral obligation to "humanitarian intervention" in cases of genocide — of which Pope John Paul II spoke at the Rome-based U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization in 1992 — raises interesting questions about reviving the classic category of "punishment for evil." <br /><br />In the case of Iraq, the crucial issue in the moral analysis is what we mean by an "aggression under way." When a vicious regime that has not hesitated to use chemical weapons against its own people and against a neighboring country, a regime that has no concept of the rule of law and that flagrantly violates its international obligations, works feverishly to obtain and deploy further weapons of mass destruction, I think a compelling moral case can be made that this is a matter of an "aggression under way." <br /><br />The nature of the regime, which is the crucial factor in the analysis, makes that plain. It surely makes no moral sense to say that the U.S. or the international community can only respond with armed force when an Iraqi missile carrying a weapon of mass destruction has been launched, or is being readied for launch. <br /><br />To be sure, there are serious questions of prudence to be addressed in thinking through the question of military action against the Iraqi regime. At the level of moral principle, however, it seems to me that there are, in fact, instances where it is not only right to "go first," but "going first" may even be morally obligatory. And I think this may well be one of those instances.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-26350357767967029922012-05-13T19:24:20.565-05:002012-05-13T19:24:20.565-05:00Bill,
Hello again! Although the principle of def...Bill,<br /><br />Hello again! Although the principle of defense is a grave duty at all levels, defense presupposes an action by the aggressor requiring defense. While I have not researched terribly in depth the issue of preemptive strikes, I would argue, based on the predominant Christian view of just war theory (jus ad bellum), that no, they are not justified by the individual...or , for that matter, at any level.<br /><br />CCC 2309 lays out the four rigorous, strict conditions for entry into war:<br /><br />At one and the same time:<br />1. the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;<br />2. all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;<br />3. there must be serious prospects of success;<br />4. the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.<br /><br />I would argue "no" based on my interpretation of (1), that damage inflicted by the aggressor, in the strictest sense, is not certain until the aggressive action has already begun.<br /><br />I've been mulling over a blog post specifically on just war for some time now. Do you have any other specific resources <br />with arguments for the permissibility of preemptive strikes?One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-45461780271931045202012-05-11T14:54:34.275-05:002012-05-11T14:54:34.275-05:00Of course I understand that when applied to simple...Of course I understand that when applied to simple hypotheticals - and agree. However, you do mention ccc 2265 applies from the state on down through you as a father. And it is a "grave duty": something you MUST do and something sinful if you do not do it (grave). So...if the state (military) can take preemptive strikes, can you also as a father do the same? I believe from a Catholic perspective, theologians disagree on this preemptive strike issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-14843850867508189342012-02-13T00:00:26.636-06:002012-02-13T00:00:26.636-06:00Amen, brother!Amen, brother!Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-33403615438586883452012-02-05T12:46:31.065-06:002012-02-05T12:46:31.065-06:00While I completely understand giving attention whe...While I completely understand giving attention where it is truly needed, it is good to have you (and L) back online. I have missed both blogs!Charhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13406064133884560608noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-43458312920587567542011-11-06T15:44:37.400-06:002011-11-06T15:44:37.400-06:00Thanks for the response; I know you're a busy ...Thanks for the response; I know you're a busy guy. I'll look forward to more on the subject of posivitism.robbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01300185429785054438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-81367312206583564002011-11-05T15:00:25.164-05:002011-11-05T15:00:25.164-05:00Robbie,
Thanks for your feedback. I would say th...Robbie,<br /><br />Thanks for your feedback. I would say that my wife and I have come, over the years, to a mutual perspective of being "socially conservative libertarians," more along the lines of the form of Libertarianism that our founders subscribed to. Of course, we disagree with the common libertarian position that "gay marriage" ought to be legalized because, according to the natural law, it is self-evident physically that two people of the same sex are not capable of consummating marriage. It's physically impossible. Two people can form any kind of association they want, and are free to engage in quasi-sexual behavior, but to try to co-opt the institution of marriage, the basic building block of the family and society, is an attempt at legal positivism that flies in the face of the natural law.<br /><br />I hope that's a start. I'm going to chew on your question some more, and am drafting a post on what is so wrong with positivism.One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-55252741749366064762011-11-05T14:47:40.692-05:002011-11-05T14:47:40.692-05:00Robbie,
I have a hard time remembering too, which...Robbie,<br /><br />I have a hard time remembering too, which is part of the reason I think I felt prompted to write it. It is so easy to lose that frame of reference and start the slide down the long, slippery slope to despair.One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-50022970643840830622011-11-02T23:43:42.230-05:002011-11-02T23:43:42.230-05:00Mmm, yes, I needed that last paragraph, and the la...Mmm, yes, I needed that last paragraph, and the last line especially. Blessed John Paul II was such a man of hope but I always have a hard time remembering why. I remember it for a little while and then I get caught up in "stuff" and forget. Thanks for the reminder.robbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01300185429785054438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-85003947886588047192011-11-02T23:29:59.207-05:002011-11-02T23:29:59.207-05:00I read your guest post on The Bubble and came over...I read your guest post on The Bubble and came over to read more. I enjoy your style and topics. Thanks for sharing these letters, which I otherwise might not have seen. <br /><br />It's been mentioned that you have (generally speaking) libertarian views. My 17yr old considers himself libertarian, and has tried to convince me that "we cannot legislate morality"--even though he would not personally endorse same-sex marriage. I'm horribly poor at forming logical arguments or being able to clearly articulate why this issue is so important from more than a moral or religious perspective. Your post on natural law was a good one to share with him. Anything else you might point me to that would speak to his "libertarian sensibilities"? Thanks for any ideas! I appreciate the work you are doing here.robbiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01300185429785054438noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-20349140051146801352011-10-24T20:44:18.719-05:002011-10-24T20:44:18.719-05:00I have no tips (as a wife and mother). This is wha...I have no tips (as a wife and mother). This is what I've been struggling with as well. Please share any insight!Kaitlin @ More Like Maryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02260649249438520187noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-82129558478280175472011-10-09T21:13:46.556-05:002011-10-09T21:13:46.556-05:00Thanks Leila. I'm just starting to get famili...Thanks Leila. I'm just starting to get familiar with Positivism & its relationship to progressivism, and definitely look forward to reasearching to write a well-informed post about it.One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-28181861689023702982011-10-08T19:25:55.981-05:002011-10-08T19:25:55.981-05:00"It should be clear that Positivism’s scheme ..."It should be clear that Positivism’s scheme of law relies upon the people obeying laws because they are afraid of the government, not because those laws are in accord with the Natural Law, and therefore just."<br /><br />Whoa! This is excellent.Leila@LittleCatholicBubblehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09357573787143230160noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-64005260048246218892011-09-10T21:24:42.514-05:002011-09-10T21:24:42.514-05:00Bill,
Thanks for commenting. As much as CC 2265 ...Bill,<br /><br />Thanks for commenting. As much as CC 2265 would add legitimacy to the movie, I don't think so. "Defense" is the key word. That defense becomes illegitimate where it crosses into the realm of justice or, worse, vengeance. Justice is a function of the state & ultimately of God. Basically, a good rule of thumb (IMHO) is that, if a police officer wouldn't be justified in doing it, neither would I.One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-5293713404585604172011-09-09T22:26:53.415-05:002011-09-09T22:26:53.415-05:00Can you apply ccc 2265 to the movie Boondock Saint...Can you apply ccc 2265 to the movie Boondock Saints?bill - dad of sevennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-67246536280843717952011-08-31T09:08:27.977-05:002011-08-31T09:08:27.977-05:00I think I just found a summary of all the Catholic...I think I just found a summary of all the Catholic awesomeness the internet has to offer on one page...thanks!Mousenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7361786387417777890.post-50794895216605264252011-08-05T11:23:53.614-05:002011-08-05T11:23:53.614-05:00Leila & God Alone,
Thanks again for your feed...Leila & God Alone,<br /><br />Thanks again for your feedback. Yes, marriage absolutely ought to be defended in the public forum. Ron Paul's argument is that the whole discussion is taking place at the wrong level. The power of the federal government to "define" marriage at all, is more than it ever should have had in the matter. Noone should be able to coerce another person to accept their point of view, on marriage or any other topic, using the force of government (which, ultimately must back any law), and no state should be forced to accept the so-called "same-sex marriage" of a state where it is legalized. Finally, in light of the First Amendment, we cannot restrict, by force, the ability of anyone to believe or say what they choose to believe. If two people do choose to form a legal association (union?) and call it "marriage," we must do everything in our power to convince them of their error and of the beauty of God's design, but we cannot force or coerce them to change their mind.<br /><br />I fear that, for brevity's sake, I am not able to do his position full justice. Dr. Paul explains his position, and his support of DoMA and the Marriage Protection Act, better than I can, in a letter he wrote on the issue back in 2004, "The Federal Marriage Amendment is a Bad Idea": http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul207.html<br /><br />Wikipedia also has an accurate synopsis of his positions on sexual orientation legislation:<br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Ron_Paul#Sexual_orientation_legislation.<br /><br />I defeinitely look forward to continued discussion about this!One Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02359492539226825134noreply@blogger.com