Previous 11 - 20 Next
In response to:

Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition

Andy544 Wrote: 22 hours ago (12:51 PM)
du2 says: "There is no requirement or NEED to believe in God..." That, my friend, is where you fatally miss the boat....as do all the secular humanists who believe they are free to 're-write' God's moral laws....
In response to:

Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition

Andy544 Wrote: 22 hours ago (12:50 PM)
du2 says: "There is no requirement or NEED to believe in God..." That, my friend, is where you fatally miss the boat....as do all the secular humanists who believe they are free to 're-write' God's moral laws....
In response to:

Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition

Andy544 Wrote: 22 hours ago (12:46 PM)
Chapman's speciality is belittling traditional American values and adherence to the Constitution, or a adhering to faith-based morality....
In response to:

Gay Marriage and the Limits of Tradition

Andy544 Wrote: 23 hours ago (11:43 AM)
A very lame answer was given by the attorney when the judge asked him what 'worthy goals' were served by the prohibition of homosexual marriage: "Tradition", he lamely replied. Wrong. There are ALL kinds of 'traditions' in this world. Many of them are NOT worth preserving. 30 years ago, the Judge would never even have asked the question, because the matter would never have come to trial for discussion. People in society KNEW that homosexuality is a sin against the Creator and His creation and an affront to a godly society...... which, btw, is the CORRECT answer to the Judge's question. A society that rejects the knowledge of God, and rejects His moral laws has nothing other than subjective,changing human opinions to base its laws and values upon. Fools make a mock at sin, but God will not be mocked, and the wages of sin is STILL death,,,,,
In response to:

Militarization of Police II

Andy544 Wrote: Aug 30, 2014 9:18 AM
Ferguson was a litmus test that quickly divided America into two camps: (1. those who believe an over-armed, militaristic, over-aggressive 'gestapo like' police force is responsible for the problems occurring in urban America, and (2. those who believe a dysfunctional and broken black sub-culture, which desperately needs to take responsibility for its own actions and choices, is the problem (a buck naked emperor has been clothed with all manner of imaginary gowns by liberal apologists for the past 50 years). The fact that the Mainstream Media immediately rushed into the fray, declaring the officer guilty of murder, before even attempting to ascertain the facts of the situation, is despicable.... but in line with its character. The Townhall columnists who immediately took up the mantra, "It's the police force's fault- they are over-militarized", I have 'crossed off' my list for ever reading again. They are either (1, idiots, or (2. liars.
In response to:

Militarization of Police II

Andy544 Wrote: Aug 30, 2014 9:10 AM
STOOPID
In response to:

The Loss of Christian Empathy

Andy544 Wrote: Aug 29, 2014 1:32 PM
The people who ran the Underground Railroad prior to the Civil War were lawbreakers, according to the laws of their times. But Whose Law were they upholding? The people who provide sanctuary and assistance to illegal aliens today are breaking the Immigration laws of the United States; but in the end, Whose Law are they upholding? If Jesus encountered a ragged family of Latinos who had just entered the country illegally, would He hold them at gunpoint for Border Patrol to pick them up? Or would He given them something to eat and drink and help them on their way? Gappa's column is not that far off-base. There is a hardness developing among many who call themselves Christian. "Because lawlessness shall abound, the love of many shall grow cold." (Matthew 24)
Bottom line: Public signage should be for public business. Displaying advertising on traffic caution signs is a horrible idea.
This was a PUBLIC traffic caution sign, on PUBLIC property- not the appropriate venue to advertise ANYTHING.... bacon, guns, beer, hair cream, real estate, included.. nada.... Also, to 'flip' this column's argument on its 'head', let's take the following scenario: thru some fluke of circumstances, the Islamic community of America decides it REALLY like Burlington, VT and moves there in droves. The city council of Burlington soon has a Muslim majority. To honor one of the local businesses that has been active in highway cleanup and beautification efforts, the city council decides to erect a traffic caution sign on one of the local streets that includes advertising for this business. The sign says, "Yield and buy Ibrahim's Burkhas-Best in the West!" How do you think that one would fly with the rest of Burlington's citizens? Bottom line: mixing public signs (traffic warning signs, at that!) with private enterprise is not a good idea.
There seems to be an aspect of this story not being talked about. Was this "yield' street sign a PUBLIC SIGN located on PUBLIC PROPERTY? And if this was a public 'street sign' (with the shape and color of a traffic 'warning/caution' sign) to caution and warn drivers to YIELD to oncoming traffic, isn't it a little confusing to have a 'cute' restaurant advertisement plastered on it? "Yield" signs are important traffic message symbols. Public traffic signs are not appropriate venues to advertise restaurants or "Bacon". I have no problem with "bacon" or a restaurant advertising its business. I do have a problem with 'mixing' traffic caution signs with advertising promotions.
In response to:

Scotland's Future Hangs in Balance

Andy544 Wrote: Aug 28, 2014 4:54 PM
The guy holding the "End London Rule" sign (in the photo above) looks a little like Bill O'Reilly. Must be the common Gaelic origins.
Previous 11 - 20 Next