On Apr 14, 10:25=A0pm, "Bill S" <whst...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
pro=
hibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or
o=
f the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petiti=
on the government for a redress of grievances.
>
> So polygamists have the right to practice their religion; and the
follower=
s of radical Islam, who apparently believe blowing up the Jew and the
infide=
l is a religious requirement for getting into heaven; and Satan wor****pers
h=
ave the right to perform animal and/or human sacrifices.
> If these three are protected by the Constitution then let's go even
furthe=
r. =A0Judaism is an old religion, much older than Christianity. =A0The
Mormo=
n religion was considered revitalized Christianity and it sprouted from
New =
York around 1800. =A0 Gerald Garner is said to have founded the modern
Wicca=
movement somewhere in the early 1960's after he spent time in a British
cov=
en that went back some thirty years. =A0Gardnerian Wicca followers
practice =
their rituals "skyclad" or completely **** and some rituals end when a man
a=
nd woman copulate in front of the coven. =A0 Then a few teens in the local
h=
igh school decide to establish a following for Satan. =A0They dress in
black=
, paint =A0inverted pentagrams on themselves, and on Halloween decide to
rou=
nd up stray cats and kill them in honor of Satanic powers.
>
> So if you and I can believe the first amendment to be sound in all
definit=
ions since its inception, where does society draw the line on what is
accept=
able religious practice? =A0 Trick question, we can't. =A0The government
can=
not react to the population complaining about another religion's
practice. =
=A0
>
> ****ists have never as a structured organization declared a practice of
goi=
ng ****d was necessary to attain heaven or God's blessings, so our ****
acti=
vity has never enjoyed constitutional protection as a religion. =A0We have
h=
ad protection by the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and we
gathe=
r in our colonies, camps, and resorts to socialize and share our belief.
=A0=
>
> The compound raid in Texas will not hold constitutional muster. =A0The
gov=
ernment claims a young girl called them by cell phone but they have not
prod=
uced her, and she allegedly claimed an older man abused her, be he hasn't
be=
en identified either. =A0 This stinks. =A0No probable cause. =A0A
fabricated=
scenario used to violate their constitutional right to peacefully
assemble,=
and also to violate their religious practice. =A0
>
> Stay tuned to this story, the court system will push this one all the
way =
to the US Supreme Court. =A0 Freedom to peacefully assemble was violated
wit=
h fictitious characters. =A0 If this ploy works in the courts, any ****ist
re=
sort where children are taken by their parents could be raided by the
local =
police, with the excuse that a young child called on a cell phone claiming
a=
n adult molested him or her. =A0Its not far-fetched; we had many teachers
pr=
y into private family lives and re****t parents for possible child abuse.
=A0=
The child protective service people move in and destroy the family
unit--gui=
lty until proven innocent.
>
> Zee has problems with adults exposing their crotches to each other, to
adv=
ertise their wares for illicit swinging. =A0He also has problems with
childr=
en seeing sloppy-pig adults acting like animals in front of kids, giving
the=
kids ideas way before they are mature to handle the information. =A0 He
doe=
sn't make it up, he just forgets that there are others who are respectful
of=
themselves and others, and mindful of the children's innocence, and that
so=
me of us believe you can raise children to grow up to become healthy ****d
p=
eople.
>
> The point is our society has to keep defining the balance between where
th=
e government steps in for our own good and where they stay the heck out of
o=
ur lives and let us pursue life, liberty, and happiness. =A0 IMHO,
whenever =
we allow the government to step in, they tend to never leave. =A0
>
> Bill S in AZ
>
>
>
> <good...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
messagenews:3565da5f-2820-40dc-9683-b8c1fe1a45=
0b@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Polygamy: More than one spouse.
> > Monogamy: One spouse - So if you're not married, -- [you're not
> > technically] -- monogamous.
> > Polyandry: More than one husband.
> > Monandry: One husband.
> > Polygyny: More than one wife.
> > Monogyny: One wife.
> > Bigamy: the criminal offense of marrying one person while still
> > legally married to another.
> > Trigamy: Having 3 spouses at one time (17th-19th Century England)*
> > From the modern legal perspective, Trigamy has been viewed as two
> > counts of Bigamy.
>
> > Polygamy should be legalized and we should be allowed to choose as
> > many spouses as we please. =A0We should be allowed to form bigger
> > families than just two people and children.
>
> > Men should be allowed to have two or three wives if they want. =A0Or
> > five or six or seven.
>
> > Women should be allowed to have two or three husbands if they want.
> > Or five or six or seven.
>
> > Who in the hell would only have ONE best friend.
>
> > Who in the hell would only have one person in their family who loved
> > them.
>
> > Polygamy is good for polyamory and free love.
>
> > Life *is* about loving relation****ps.
>
> > This solves the question of gay marriage also.
>
> > So you can have brother-husbands and sister-wives (when you marry your
> > spouse's spouse; a non-***ual friend/loved one of the same ***).
>
> > With Polygamy you should have to get your other spouse's(') consent
> > before you marry a subsequent spouse. =A0If you don't get their
consent
> > then it's Bigamy.
>
> > The question is how much of your wealth should be split when you
> > divorce. When you marry one person, you split it all and keep 50%.
> > When you marry two people, you split it three ways or keep 50% and
> > split 50% two ways. =A0I'm with keeping 50% for myself I think.
=A0Also
> > you could be married to different numbers of people than your spouses,
> > if your spouses weren't married to each other, but you should only be
> > entitled to the same percentage of their wealth that they are entitled
> > to of yours.
>
> > If your spouse wants to marry someone, =A0you can say "no" and they
can
> > say let me marry another or divorce me, and you can say divorce me, or
> > "okay you can marry. "Or you can say that they can only marry the
> > other if you can marry the other also. =A0Money may play a large role
> > here.
>
> > Like if your spouse is very rich, you might not want them marrying
> > another because there goes some of their wealth that you were entitled
> > to. =A0Unless the person who they are going to marry is also very
rich,
> > and you can marry them also.
>
> > If your spouses new spouse to be is as rich or richer than your
> > spouse, then you could place the condition on your spouses marriage,
> > that your spouse(s) can only marry the new spouse if you can marry the
> > new spouse also.
>
> > There are Mormons living in suburban Utah who are polygamous anyway,
> > and they should be allowed to have that legally recognized - marriage
> > is just for money. But if some girl is staying home and taking care of
> > your children she should be entitled to some of your money legally.
> > Thus legalized Polygamy is a necessity for people who cohabit in
> > groups as husbands and wives. =A0Then everyone earns an more equal
> > percentage of the worker's earnings. =A0As it is today, if a wife
lives
> > as a second spouse of a married couple, and later divorces, she is
> > legally entitled to none of her husband's money. =A0This is unfair.
>
> > No one should get married until age 18 unless they or their partner is
> > pregnant and it has been ascertained by a competent third party such
> > as a judge that they are making the choice of marriage of their own
> > free will and not being forced or unduly pressured into it. =A0But
this
> > only stands for marriage recognized by the state. =A0Trully marriage
> > exists only the hearts and minds of the married people.
>
> > All marriage legally is, is a binding of financial fortunes. =A0If
> > everyone makes the same amount of money then legal marriage doesn't
> > matter.
>
> > Polygamy is good for polyamory and free love. =A0Free love is not all
> > inclusive, just less exclusive.
>
> > Life *is* about loving relation****ps.
>
> > Polygamy is good because there will be less divorce. =A0This matters
> > when there's children. =A0Instead of getting divorced you can get
> > another spouse, and wait until your kids are 18 and out of the house
> > and gone away to college. =A0This is often better for the children.
>
> > It's good because the children have several mothers and several
> > fathers and more sup****t from adults. =A0Families are richer and
> > stronger.
>
> > Okay hopefully we'll have marriage freedom in the near future.
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> > *There was an old fellow of Lyme
> > Who lived with three wives at one time.
> > When asked, 'Why the third?'
> > He replied, 'One's absurd,
> > and bigamy, sir, is a crime.'- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
