#304231 · 11 Dec 2003, 13:01 · · პროფილი · პირადი მიმოწერა · ჩატი
Bush was interviewed by the journalists and asked the question: what is your position on "same-sex-marriages" ? Bush answered that he recognizes only the union "man and women", and he has the jurists working on this problem.
It would be rather ridiculous to denounce sham-marriages between homos, while accepting their “concept” of sex as true, meaning the proposition that copulation of what is genital with what is not genital is SEX. Unless we want to burn all our dictionaries, sexual intercourse is what involves two genital organs—not one, and what takes place between two opposites.
The legal definition of sexual intercourse is “penetration of female organ by male organ.” Now, who has the right to revise the legal definition of the basic fact of life without any debate? Furthermore, if everything can be justified because it happens between “consenting adults”, then there is no reason whatever for condemning incest as something so dreadfully wrong.
We know the US as the Great republic. The cause of the Great Republic is the cause of republicanism worldwide. It seems as if the nation, which “assumed equal station among the powers of the earth” according to “the laws of Nature and Nature’s God” were in travail to establish imbecility as the law of human thinking, while the President of the great Republic who is engaged in bitter struggle against most vicious enemies of the Republic is compelled to spend his time on as vulgar a topic as “same-sex-marriages”.
--------------------
Get paid every time your website is seen.. http://kakheti.net/payperplay_s_cgi.html
|
same-sex-marriages, Bush was interviewed by the journalists and asked the question: what is your position on "same-sex-marriages" ?
