The "Tolerant Left" Strikes Again

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#722 Apr 24, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
You may wish to research the foundation of that statement a bit.
woof
You lefties can spin in circles and weave fairytales from now until the end of time, but Ms. Hale has publicly announced that she is living, without intent to change, in what the Church deems to be an immoral relationship; therefore, she has been terminated per the terms of her signed contract.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#723 Apr 24, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
So people who are medically unable to perform coitus cannot be married?
I'm embarrassed for you.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#724 Apr 24, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
You lefties can spin in circles and weave fairytales from now until the end of time, but Ms. Hale has publicly announced that she is living, without intent to change, in what the Church deems to be an immoral relationship; therefore, she has been terminated per the terms of her signed contract.
Well, Paco and his brethren better get out their wallets.

woof
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#725 Apr 24, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm embarrassed for you.
And yet another question that you can't answer because it would concede the logical failure of your "definitions."

-Clayton Bigsby

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#726 Apr 24, 2013
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, Paco and his brethren better get out their wallets.
woof
Let's see how many of you "outraged" outsiders who have no business in the matter come through for HER attorney fees. Put your money where your mouth is, lefties.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#727 Apr 24, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
And yet another question that you can't answer because it would concede the logical failure of your "definitions."
Your sire is so proud.

Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#728 Apr 24, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Your sire is so proud.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =0yuMbalHQ2IXX
You have nothing left but ham handed attempts at insult.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#729 Apr 24, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You have nothing left but ham handed attempts at insult.
Believe me, there is no other way to communicate with you.

-Clayton Bigsby

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#730 Apr 24, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
You have nothing left but ham handed attempts at insult.
The projection is strong with you today, troll.
Connoiseur

Columbus, OH

#731 Apr 24, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
To review, Ms. Hale publicly announced that she is living with a domestic partner.
***
domes&#8242;tic part&#8242;ner
n.
either member of an unmarried, cohabiting, and esp. homosexual couple that seeks benefits usu. available only to spouses.
***
"Chaste" and "spouse" are, in the minds of sane individuals, mutually exclusive.
You saying that chaste implies abstinence?

IOW, a married woman cannot be chaste, meaning faithful to her husband, morally grounded in her sexuality?

Interesting conclusion. Sidebar--the Middle English term "hussif" provides the same root that later became two different words, one is "hussy" and the other "housewife." But I always assumed they meant different things.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#732 Apr 24, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Believe me, there is no other way to communicate with you.
Not for you, there isn't. You don't seem to possess the intellect.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#733 Apr 24, 2013
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>The projection is strong with you today, troll.
He says, as he "trolls."
Connoiseur

Columbus, OH

#734 Apr 24, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
You lefties can spin in circles and weave fairytales from now until the end of time, but Ms. Hale has publicly announced that she is living, without intent to change, in what the Church deems to be an immoral relationship; therefore, she has been terminated per the terms of her signed contract.
So--the issue is not having relations--as the Church seems to claim, it is in being in an immoral relationship.

Let me just wonder a bit here. How would you define that relationship? Is every partnership between two lesbians immoral? For instance, could they run a business together? Could they dance or perform together? Could they own property together? Seems like all of those things are called partnerships. Are they all immoral if between two persons of the same sex? Were Sears and Roebuck immoral?

-Clayton Bigsby

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#735 Apr 24, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
He says, as he "trolls."
Because we all know that posting articles and backing up responses with links is "trolling," right?
Shouldn't you be in school, kid?

-Clayton Bigsby

Since: Apr 13

Hilliard, OH

#736 Apr 24, 2013
Connoiseur wrote:
<quoted text>
So--the issue is not having relations--as the Church seems to claim, it is in being in an immoral relationship.
Let me just wonder a bit here. How would you define that relationship? Is every partnership between two lesbians immoral? For instance, could they run a business together? Could they dance or perform together? Could they own property together? Seems like all of those things are called partnerships. Are they all immoral if between two persons of the same sex? Were Sears and Roebuck immoral?
The tenacity of the twisted liberal and his logic when he is beaten is a sight to behold.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#737 Apr 24, 2013
Connoiseur wrote:
<quoted text>
You saying that chaste implies abstinence?
IOW, a married woman cannot be chaste, meaning faithful to her husband, morally grounded in her sexuality?
Interesting conclusion. Sidebar--the Middle English term "hussif" provides the same root that later became two different words, one is "hussy" and the other "housewife." But I always assumed they meant different things.
Would you kindly stick to your regular moniker, Reader?

I refer you back to Duke's post:
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
I think she signed a contract that bound her to abide by the Church's principles. Let's see what they say about homosexuality:...

"Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection" (CCC 2357– 2359)."

Show me the proof Tippyhead, via the obit, that she is not living a "chaste" life....
Chastity, in this instance -- and from which Duke employed the word "chaste" -- clearly implies celibacy.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#738 Apr 24, 2013
Che Reagan Christ wrote:
<quoted text>
Not for you, there isn't. You don't seem to possess the intellect.
You play the perfect mutt begging for attention.
Shame on you for accusing SL of such things.
You clearly are the master.
Che Reagan Christ

Medina, OH

#739 Apr 24, 2013
-Clayton Bigsby wrote:
<quoted text>Because we all know that posting articles and backing up responses with links is "trolling," right?
Shouldn't you be in school, kid?
There was a link to an article in the post I responded to? I must have missed it.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#740 Apr 24, 2013
Connoiseur wrote:
<quoted text>
So--the issue is not having relations--as the Church seems to claim, it is in being in an immoral relationship.
Let me just wonder a bit here. How would you define that relationship? Is every partnership between two lesbians immoral? For instance, could they run a business together? Could they dance or perform together? Could they own property together? Seems like all of those things are called partnerships. Are they all immoral if between two persons of the same sex? Were Sears and Roebuck immoral?
All of those things are not called "domestic partnerships," dumbarse.
Enzyte Bob

Blacklick, OH

#741 Apr 24, 2013
Connoiseur wrote:
<quoted text>
So--the issue is not having relations--as the Church seems to claim, it is in being in an immoral relationship.
Let me just wonder a bit here. How would you define that relationship? Is every partnership between two lesbians immoral? For instance, could they run a business together? Could they dance or perform together? Could they own property together? Seems like all of those things are called partnerships. Are they all immoral if between two persons of the same sex? Were Sears and Roebuck immoral?
You people who are the victims of the baby boomer generation have everything backwards and are just plain confused about each and every single issue. Why is it that it takes someone like Vladimir Putin to cut to the chase with refreshing MORAL and LOGICAL clarity simply mystifies me.

MIZZZZZ Hale (or is it Mister?) teaches in a religious school. A religious school has pretty strict teachings when it comes to sexuality. These teachings are important tenets of the faith underpinning the notions of procreation, stable families and respect for one's body.

You secular baby boom eff-ups may not understand that, but traditional Catholics such as my self understand it perfectly. We grew up in that kind of environment, were immersed in these teachings and can see the benefits of living this kind of lifestyle by virtue of the stable families and lack of divorces surrounding me.

Bottom line is that I don't begrudge Mr./Ms. Hale and even feel somewhat sorry for her. But that doesn't change the fact that her lifestyle and the example she sets is CONTRARY to everything the Catholic Church stands for and we don't want our children exposed to these things at such a young age. They have plenty of time to be exposed to the seedier side of life during their adult years.

Bottom line is that control of your sexuality is a very important principle in Catholic teaching. Mr./Ms. Hale leads a lifestyle that is contrary to those teachings. The Catholic church not wanting to employ someone who is publicly know to engage in a lifestyle counter to its teachings is completely reasonable.

As I said before, just because a prostitute is proficient at teaching gym doesn't mean that the Catholic church has to employ her, nor would it. Same principle applies here.

Go back to your effed up secular government schools and leave us alone. We pay a lot of money to make sure our children are protected from your effed up baby boomer Cultural Marxist secular values in the first place.

========

Putin orders ban on adoptions by foreign same-sex couples – report

http://on.rt.com/nao3so

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Chili And Wing Cook Off Set For Saturday On Mir... 22 min Annalisa 3
Democraps....the party of rape 42 min UTrashy 19
Donald Trump Big Liar 6 hr Colonel Pale Rider 13
Men in the Girls Bathroom 11 hr UTrashy 400
News Joe Biden's Columbus destination: Jeni's Ice Cream 11 hr Three Psyche 35
ABC this Week 13 hr schlongfest 2
Joyce Hazelrigg (Feb '13) 19 hr Old sailor 8
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages