Freepers discover Governor Parnell's "let's criminalize out of wedlock sex" nominee. Hilarity ensues

[cali]

as they argue about it. There are some prime examples of the American Taliban in that thread.

To: All

I guess the Framers were Nanny Statists too? Since they passed laws banning Fornication, Blasphemy and Adultery?

13 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:55:11 PM by freedomwarrior998
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: trumandogz
"Nanny State "

Try, uh, POLICE STATE.
14 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:55:23 PM by Mariner (USS Tarawa, VQ3, USS Benjamin Stoddert, NAVCAMS WestPac, 7th Fleet, Navcommsta Puget Sound)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon

He’s right. Sex outside of marriage has been illegal throughout most of man’s civilized history. There’s a good reason for that. That reason hasn’t changed.

It would be helpful to make it illegal against.

15 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:57:01 PM by bvw
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon

Sex without the benefit of marriage was unlawful in many states as was bastardy until fairly recently. Those laws were deemed unenforceable due to widespread violation so they were removed from the codes. Legislators hate to see their states listed in those Almanacs of stupid odd laws columns. “Hey did you know it is illegal to leave a horse saddled during church on Sunday even though you can not buy beer any day of the week in Hereford Texas?”

16 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:57:23 PM by kbennkc (For those who have fought for it, freedom has a flavor the protected will never know.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon

MI am no Libertarian, but I am a Constitutional Conservative I think more than half the country would be incarcerated in the event it was illegal. Of course it is against God’s law, a sin, which carries a heavy sentence already.

17 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:57:32 PM by Paperdoll ( On the cutting edge)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: freedomwarrior998
"laws banning Fornication, Blasphemy and Adultery"

Do you support such laws?

If so, how would you propose to enforce them?

And, should such law be state or federal?
18 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:57:51 PM by Mariner (USS Tarawa, VQ3, USS Benjamin Stoddert, NAVCAMS WestPac, 7th Fleet, Navcommsta Puget Sound)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon

LOL...Heck...I always thought sex STOPPED after marraige! World’s best birth control method = Wedding cake.

Lawmakers ...listen up. Leave us alone! We don’t need your help running our lives.

19 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:58:35 PM by nagdt ("None of my EX's live in Texas")
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: apillar

An idiocy of a ruling that was. Certainly the Founders would have had no part of it.

20 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:58:36 PM by bvw
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies>
To: Mariner

“Try, uh, POLICE STATE.”

Exactly!

21 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:58:43 PM by trumandogz
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon
...his official resume failed to disclose his leadership role in Eagle Forum Alaska, which advocates for social conservative issues. He most recently was president of the organization, but resigned when he learned of his nomination, he said.

So not only is he a nanny statist, he is also a liar by omission.
22 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:58:55 PM by Ken H
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: philetus

What part of this is wrong?

” I think it’s very harmful to have extramarital affairs. It’s harmful to children, it’s harmful to the spouse who entered a legally binding agreement to marry the person that’s cheating on them.” “

23 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:59:06 PM by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies>
To: DTogo

So Jesus and Islam is the same?

24 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 7:59:46 PM by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon

A judicial candidate can say he wishes pink elephants were banned, but as long as they are not he is duty bound to follow the law as it reads. That question looks like it was wholly evaded in this report.

25 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 8:00:50 PM by HiTech RedNeck (Hawk)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: LonelyCon

Even if he believed this why would he tell them that?

Must be more to this story
26 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 8:01:18 PM by Steve Van Doorn (*in my best Eric cartman voice* 'I love you guys')
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies>
To: Mariner

I don’t agree with this guy, but just for argument sake: isn’t there a consensus that the state does have an interest in steering human sexuality toward the maintenance of stable families? Polygamy, gay sex, and abortion should all be illegal. Teens shouldn’t be handed birth control because it encourages them to be promiscuous. Is saying adultery should be illegal just a step too far, or is it somehow altogether different from these other issues?

27 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 8:01:27 PM by LonelyCon
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies>
To: driftdiver
"So Jesus and Islam is the same"

Only if they both institute a Theocracy.
28 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 8:02:40 PM by Mariner (USS Tarawa, VQ3, USS Benjamin Stoddert, NAVCAMS WestPac, 7th Fleet, Navcommsta Puget Sound)
< Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies>
To: Mariner

Silly. “Police” and “Police State” are really creations of Twentieth Century. The laws against fornication, adultery and sodomy predate records. That is to speak to the level of the mentally febrile and morally challenged — such laws have thousands of generations of human development behind them.

29 posted on Monday, March 28, 2011 8:03:47 PM by bvw

[Urban Prairie]

1. So THAT is how freepers' heads explode!!

[Terry_M]

2. "such laws have thousands of generations of human development behind them."

Wonder if that guy acknowledges that the Earth is not 6,000 years old or if he just screwed up his math...

[FLPanhandle]

14. +1

That's the first thing I noticed too. Average 20 years between each generation and he's at a minimum of 40,000 years.

[Canuckistanian]

3. "It would be helpful to make it illegal against."

Prepositions are NOT for ending sentences with.

[EOTE]

12. What makes you think that with? NT

[donco]

4. Looks like a class in pretzel bending. nt

[Marr]

5. I thought they were all for using the law to protect the "sanctity of marriage".

Apparently it's not so universally supported when it infringes on their own lives. How unexpected.

[white_wolf]

6. Quick question.

Am I the only one who has trouble following freeper threads? The site format is just so awful I can't follow it half the time.

[progressoid]

9. You're not alone.

Bulletin boards from the 90's were easier to read.

[safeinOhio]

7. Ain't that Sharia Law?

just askin.

[Fuzz]

8. I can honestly say, "I have sinned against you, my Lord!!!"

/tears
/look toward heaven
/check donations

[drmeow]

10. If I could stomach FR

I'd go over there and post this:

Were you a virgin before you got married (or are you a virgin now if you aren't married)? If you are divorced and remarried, did you refuse to have sex with your second spouse until after you were married? If you answered no to either of these questions, you would have broken this law if it was on the books!

They seem to think it is only about extra-marital sex not pre-marital sex. Laws about sex outside of marriage cover both!

[WilliamPitt]

11. "So Jesus and Islam is the same?"

(fa-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-acepalm)

[Warren DeMontague]

13. Nanny State = "bad". Nun-ny State, however...