Some Bestiality OK With Canada Supreme Court

Sickly legalizes some sick sex acts with animals

Canada's Supreme Court approves limited bestialitySo Canada’s highest court has just ruled that some sex acts between humans and animals are legal.

Despite all the acceleration of the normalization of perversion in the last few years, this still has to at least kinda shock the sensibilities.

Some folks (including the dissenting judge) expressing dismay at and condemnation of the 7-1 ruling seem to be exercised primarily by the animal abuse angle.

The human morality slippery slope is a bigger issue to me. The pursuit of certain “rights” is definitely leading to what’s morally wrong being rebranded as right. Even a leftist should find that repugnant.

Well, here are two excerpts from the story: Read it all

Kenneth L Miller, Federal Prisoner 08464-082

When the Christian faithful collide with a society in the grip of Satan's tyranny

Because “a woman’s faith and modern society collided,” Ken Miller reported to federal prison in Virginia on March 22, 2016.

In this “war against Satan’s tyranny,” Ken holds to the view that the proper weapons must be employed by the faithful disciple of Jesus. In the excerpt below, notice how he identifies such weaponry.

Ken Miller bids farewell to his home congregation Read it all

Name That President

He signed into law a measure that stigmatizes homosexual people and bans giving children any information about homosexuality.

You know at least one president which did not do this:

President…signed into law a measure that stigmatizes gay people and bans giving children any information about homosexuality.

The ban on “propaganda of nontraditional sexual relations” is part of an effort to promote traditional…values…

But which president did do that? (Today, apparently.)

Please, if you’re going to take part in this news quiz, do not search online for the answer. This is not an open-book quiz. Thank you. 🙂

What Marriage Isn’t

In the opinion of five people on the US Supreme Court

In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word ‘spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

That’s what the Defense of Marriage Act, Section 3 claimed for almost 17 years.

And what humanity claimed from the beginning of time.

And what God declared from eternity.

And what the Supreme Court of the United States today said isn’t so.

Well, what five members of that court said.

Actually, just one that mattered (if you want to look at it that way). If one of those five had voted differently, the outcome would have been different.

I wonder how those five propose to define marriage.

On what basis would they say these aren’t valid marriages:

  • Three or more people without regard to gender?
  • Two people sharing one or more spouses but not married to each other?
  • An adult and a teenager?
  • Two adult siblings?
  • Any two adults without regard to marital status or family relationship?

And how is denying such arrangements not a manifestation of bigotry, hate, phobia, and so forth?

Woe to those who call evil good and good evil — God says so.

Well, here’s another book for your consideration: Reforming Marriage

America’s Forty-Year War

Roe v Wade -- genocide, civil war, choice, murder? All? None?

Looking back on this day in 1972:

Read it all

Above all, love God!