"John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
>"Bob LeChevalier" <lojbab at lojban.org> wrote in message
>news:pgnimucbnm8jdg9qhujq4cf6bcl16krpcv at 4ax.com...>> "John Knight" <jwknight at polbox.com> wrote:
>> >Pornography is permissible, but the Word of God is not.
>>>> False. Liar.
>>This is exactly how our courts are ruling, as we speak. How can you call
>this a "lie"?
The Courts have NOT ruled that the Word of God is not permissible.
And it doesn't even accept your definition of pornography, so it
hasn't ruled it permissible.
>> >Our
>> >jewish-controlled courts routinely punish White children for acting like
>> >Christians
>>>> False. Liar.
>>Not even once?
I don't think so. But you said "routinely", not once.
>> >but some stupid nigger kid can publish a song about killing cops
>> >and raping his mother with impunity.
>>>> So can a white kid. It is called "freedom of speech". Don't like it?
>> Then leave, and we won't miss you.
>>We'd
Speak for yourself, singular loser.
>rather reclaim this Christian nation and oust the jewish trash.
My son would rather have a million dollars and a Porsche. But we're
talking reality and not your nincompoop wet dreams.
>> >Not one single adultery law has ever been repealed, but the last prosecution
>> >under this law was more than half a century ago.
>>>> Good.
>>Thanks for that admission that you support the "right of women to commit
>adultery"--making you an accomplice to a serious crime.
I admit no such thing. I admit approving that prosecution for
adultery is becoming rare. But I remind you that California's law
against adultery, that you quote on your website, WAS in fact
repealed, and there is no law against adultery in California.
>> >Cu.ts
>>>> It's just as obscene and sinful when you leave the letter out. God
>> knows what is in your heart.
>>And we know what's in God's heart
I don't pretend to know what is in God's heart, but ...
>when He prescribes stoning of the whores and harlots, don't we?
... in the words of the Lord, "Let he who is without sin cast the
first stone".
Oh, and remember that merely to look upon a woman with lust is to
commit adultery, so every time you look at the pornography you say you
hate and breathe heavily, you earn yourself another stoning.
>> >like Shere Hite brag on national TV: "70% of American wives commit
>> >adultery within 5 years of getting married".
>>>> Probably similar numbers for men, but you ignore that.
>>Men don't get pregnant.
So? Women don't get pregnant without men. And the statement was
about adultery, not pregnancy.
>> >Is this just feminazi braggadocio? No. Barbara Rothman notes in Recreating
>> >Motherhood "Some physicians doing tissue typing for organ donations estimate
>> >that maybe 20% of people are not genetically related to the men claiming
>> >fatherhood."
>>>> So much for racial purity. Just think: 20% of your ancestors may not
>> have been the father that is recorded in the genealogy.
>>Just because a woman is an adulteress, a whore and a harlot doesn't mean
>she's a race traitor too );
Doesn't mean that she isn't. And you'll never know how many "black",
"jewish", or "mud" skeletons are hanging in your ancestral closet,
will you. I'll bet you that there are quite a few.
>> >If we upheld adultery laws
>>>> then the laws would be thrown out as unconstitutional.
>>Absolutely no way. You truly are a kook. The reason no adultery law has
>been repealed
The adultery law in California that you quote on your site HAS been
repealed, probably in 1975 or 1976.
>is because they ARE constitutional. Even this pathetic gaggle
>of jews and feminazis in the "supreme" court couldn't twist this pretzel
>that far, which is why no adultery law has ever been brought before them.
Actually, it turns out that they have.
>They are not only constitutional, but a Christian nation which fails to
>uphold this one Commandment from God is doomed to failure.
Then all Christian nations are doomed to failure, because there are
unpunished adulterers in all nations. But this is not a Christian
nation.
>Your "belief"
>that you have some kind of a "right to commit adultery" is truly pathetic.
I do not have such a belief.
My belief is that it is none of your business what two people do
together in privacy.
lojbab
