New York’s Highest Court Unanimously Rules in Favor of Incest ‘Marriage’ Between Uncle and Niece

lawyerNEW YORK – New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, has ruled that a marriage between a half-uncle and a half-niece is legal in a unanimous court decision.

According to the ruling, while “parent-child and brother-sister marriages . . . are grounded in the almost universal horror with which such marriages are viewed . . . there is no comparably strong objection to uncle-niece marriages.”

The case revolved around a 34-year-old Vietnamese citizen Huyen Nguyen, 34, who appealed to a ruling by an immigration judge declaring that her marriage in 2000 in Rochester was invalid. This ruling would have resulted to her deportation from the United States. Her husband, Vu Truong, 38, was her mother’s half-brother. According to the couple’s lawyer, Michael Marscalkowski, the case was not done for immigration purposes. The couple has stayed together for more than 14 years and husband Vu Truong works as a truck driver. They have no children together.

“This really was an all-or-nothing issue for them,” Marscalkowski commented. “If this would have been denied, she would have been deported and sent back to Vietnam.”

Marscalkowski said he won the case by focusing on the statutory provisions of the state’s domestic-relations law.

The statute provided that “a marriage is incestuous and void whether the relatives are legitimate or illegitimate between either: 1. An ancestor and a descendant; 2. A brother and sister of either the whole or half-blood; 3. An uncle and niece or an aunt and nephew.”

Incest is a crime punishable by a $50 to $100 fine and up to six months in jail.

  • Connect with Christian News

On the matter of consanguinity or blood relations, Marscalkowski argued during court proceedings, that half-uncles and nieces share the same level of genetic ties as first cousins. This would only result to only one-eighth of the DNA.

“It really was the equivalent of cousins marrying, which has been allowed in New York state for well over 100 years,” Marszalkowski said.

The six-person panel of judges reviewing the case acknowledged that while they are not scientists, they noted that the “genetic risk in a half-uncle, half-niece relationship is half what it would be if the parties were related by the full blood.” This would lessen any genetic abnormalities that would result from children born from the union.

Drawing from past case decisions, Judge Robert Smith of the Court of Appeals opined that such marriages were lawful in New York until 1893 and it is still lawful in Rhode Island.

Judge Victoria Graffeo and two other judges on the panel, however, hesitated on their opinion, stating that Legislature should revisit the issue.

“Such relationships could implicate one of the purposes underlying incest laws, i.e., ‘maintaining the stability of the family hierarchy by protecting young family members from exploitation by older family members in positions of authority, and by reducing competition and jealous friction among family members,’ Graffeo wrote.

Michael Stutman from the firm Mischon de Reya, an independent attorney and family relations expert, said that the ruling reflects the realities of contemporary American families.

Stutman commented that “as people are more mobile and living longer marriages are ending and people remarry and you get blended families with step children and half children.”

Commenting on the rationale behind the court decision, Stutman argues “There are plenty of other societies that allow so-called intermarriage without worrying about genetic defects. And frankly we have a long history of cousins marrying each other, take FDR and Eleanor Roosevelt,” he said.

However, Jason McGuire, executive director of the conservative civil rights group, New Yorkers for Constitutional Freedoms, implied that this court’s decision would create a dangerous legal precedent.

“If government’s only interest in marriage is who loves each other, than what logical stopping point is there?” McGuire said.


A special message from the publisher...

Dear Reader, our hearts are deeply grieved by the ongoing devastation in Iraq, and through this we have been compelled to take a stand at the gates of hell against the enemy who came to kill and destroy. Bibles for Iraq is a project to put Arabic and Kurdish audio Bibles into the hands of Iraqi and Syrian refugees—many of whom are illiterate and who have never heard the gospel.Will you stand with us and make a donation today to this important effort? Please click here to send a Bible to a refugee >>

Print Friendly
  • linda

    Why is public opinion a question? The last few years have been about saying the public’s opinion on who marries who does not matter in regard to who can marry who. The Egyptian royalty had no problem with father/daughter or sister/brother. Incest is not legal based on too close of a genetic line and the higher probability for birth defects.

    According to the ruling, while “parent-child and brother-sister marriages . . . are grounded in the almost universal horror with which such marriages are viewed . . . there is no comparably strong objection to uncle-niece marriages.”

  • http://google.com IntheCustodyofCarl’sJr.

    So this girl was 20 when they got married. He was 24. How long before that had they been messing around? Sounds like grooming to me. But who knows, if they have a strong vietnamese culture, might this be normal practice in that culture?

    • Phipps Mike

      “Sounds like grooming to me.”
      you may be onto something.

  • Phipps Mike

    Even if the risk is lower against genetic defects passing on to their children, they are STILL half blood and the fact of their ROLES are in question. Its wrong morally to marry a family member, even if they are “step”.

    • Gary

      Same-sex marriage is also morally wrong, but the courts don’t care.

      • Phipps Mike

        your little dig isn’t going to work on me. The morals I mention are not questionable. Same sex marriage being a moral breaker IS questionable.
        You can sit there and spout all your coded scripture all you want and profess that what YOU say is what it means, but you are no authority on the Bibles translations.

        • Gary

          The Bible speaks for itself on homosexuality and marriage. You just don’t believe what it says. You have rejected God’s moral standards and tried to replace them with your own. God won’t allow that.

          • Phipps Mike

            ” You just don’t believe what it says.”
            because MAN wrote it, God didn’t. Lay bets that on judgment day, many Christians will find out that the Bible really wasn’t supposed to be written in a patriarchal fashion or used to justify bigotry.

          • Gary

            According to the American Heritage Dictionary, a bigot is one who is intolerant. That means God is the ultimate bigot since He is intolerant of everyone who violates his moral laws.

          • Phipps Mike

            Right, but think about that. God created us, HE has the right to be intolerant. MAN does NOT. By doing it yourself, you are putting yourself as equivalent to God (judging). That is blasphemy. God gave us FREE will knowing that no man will be able to force other men to be what they expect them to be and to test true faith. Witnessing is to SUGGEST, NOT command. Only GOD may command.

          • Gary

            God has already judged homosexuals to be immoral, and He did that long before I came on the scene. I have no authority to disagree with what God has decided, and agreeing with God’s decision is the right thing to do. Additionally, I am instructed, from the New Testament, that I should not approve of the wickedness that anyone does. That means I cannot approve of homosexuality, or same-sex marriage. I cannot accept those things as being legitimate, which means, I oppose them.

          • Phipps Mike

            Right, except to expound upon that. You may oppose whatever sin but you may not take ACTION against it. The only exception is that you have a right to guide your own children and we must go by man made laws in order for safety of the public. Quite frankly, God made it HIS and Jesus’s business to do the ACTION on judgment day. You are not ALLOWED to punish strangers for their sins.

          • Sha-wei

            Do you persist in your double-faced pontificating, you hypocrite? You sully the holy names by mouthing them in your anti-Christian zealotry. It is totally evident from your words and underlying attitudes which fallen god you serve, and if you don’t repent before the great circle of history closes – and it closes sooner than you think – you may well find yourself sharing your god’s fiery destiny. The cosmic serpent is about to engulf its own tail in its primeval maw, “Phipps”, and where will you be when it does – within or without?

            And, as said before, you straddle opposing arguments in order to APPEAR objective and reasonable (but you are far from it, given your clear agenda of destabilizing positions that uphold what is good and true). Or do you not remember writing, in trying to win over one of your most persistent detractors –
            a Christian philanthropist – several months ago: “Look, I think what they do is disgusting…” in reference to homosexuals? Search and refresh your memory with your own words. Yet you also presume to pass yourself off as a champion of “equal rights for all”, etc.

            Lastly, do you think you long deceive anyone with your bogus “Facebook” page – regularly and artificially updated to appear bona fide, with your plaintive and oft-repeated galimatias of fabricated personal details, and with that photograph of someone’s uncle as your avatar? Everything about you is
            phony, “Phipps”, or need I remind you of the occasion when you were called that by some eloquent poster earlier this year? You are one unhappy individual, a fact you manifest every time you put ideas into words. Your only hope is the same as ours is, or has been: REPENT!

          • Phipps Mike

            “And, as said before, you straddle opposing arguments in order to APPEAR objective and reasonable (but you are far from it, given your clear agenda of destabilizing positions that uphold what is good and true). ”

            I am as reasonable as a person is going to get. Living and let live is the epitome of “reasonable.”

            “a Christian philanthropist – several months ago: “Look, I think what they do is disgusting…” in reference to homosexuals?”

            yes, i did say that. The ACT is disgusting but it doesn’t give, me, you, or anybody else the right to do anything about it. I have no problem with them doing what they do with each other, just count ME out.

            “Lastly, do you think you long deceive anyone with your bogus “Facebook” page – regularly and artificially updated to appear bona fide,”

            I remember you accusing me of this a little while back, Not only are you GROSSLY incorrect, but it shows a LACK of intelligence on your part. I hardly EVER update my facebook page, I hardly ever do the status messages. I am who you see on my avatar. If you want to see, give me a place and time to webcam to you and you name the messenger of choice. I am the real deal and there isn’t anybody tough enough on this planet to make me “hide” my true identity. I will actually fistfight to back my passions and beliefs. So please, get over yourself and if you need proof, name the messenger and time. Oh and you will need to provide me with your user name on that messenger.

          • Sha-wei

            Fellow, you have thus far amply proven yourself an emissary of the Adversary towards Christians on these forums, your customary calling card the truculent and vulgar tone that accompanies your heresies.

            But, if I have laid any untrue charge at your door otherwise, I tender an earnest apology and repent before the Righteous Judge, who sees all, of my sin of bearing false witness.

            May He do you justice commensurate with the damage occasioned by this his most unworthy servant. Amen.

          • Phipps Mike

            Sha, I am a Protestant Baptist. I am not against Christianity. I am against bigotry, hatred, resentment and any notion that any man has a right to dictate another’s life. We are in a FREE country that was founded to go AGAINST monarchy or a one religion rulership. Freedom is the extension of FREE WILL. that God GAVE TO US. So to go against a persons freedom is to go against God. That freedom includes SSM. If somebody is sinning, it is God’s and ONLY Gods place to do anything about it.
            I wouldn’t spend my time in here typing a kazillion messages if I didnt think you people were worth trying to reach. Obviously I don’t hate you, I wouldn’t BE here if I did.
            Its not my mission to totally change your minds, its more a plea for you all to be NICER to Homosexuals than what has been currently going on.
            I can pretty much guarantee that if everybody allowed SSM without quarrel. The homosexual vs Christian war would end.
            My vulgar tone comes only when a person has been vulgar with their own tone towards me. I do unto others as they do unto me. If you met me in person, you would be SHOCKED at how nice I really am. That’s part of the reason I invited you to a webcam session with me.
            Apology accepted.

          • Gary

            How am I punishing homosexuals?

          • Phipps Mike

            if you do anything that’s an action to keep them from marrying, its punishment. There are many other actions that would count as well if you partake in them.

        • Sha-wei

          Immeasurably less of an authority on God’s Word are you, “Phipps”, as you attempt once more to play both sides of the field (for us to drop our guard), after the manner of your master the Devil. For you are NO Christian, “Phipps”, and your true allegiance to your Dark Lord surfaces irremediably in the positions you take. As such, you have NOTHING of worth to contribute to any discussion on “morals”.

          And thus, “you can have no part or share in God’s word because your heart isn’t right with God. Therefore, change your heart and life! Turn from your wickedness! Plead with the Lord in the hope that your wicked intent can be forgiven, for I see that your bitterness has poisoned you and evil has you in chains.” Indeed, “Phipps”, that you are in bondage is painfully obvious, but there is ONE who came to free us from spiritual slavery. Heed the warning while you can, as I did.

          • Phipps Mike

            says yet ANOTHER self professed pious person. I am “evil” because YOU say so…ooohhhh!!! scary! it’s Halloween so you better watch out for me! I have no allegiance to the devil, that supposition is as hollow as most of your other statements in other threads. As judgmental as you are, I bet you are the first to hell. Oh and newsflash, Morals don’t BELONG to God, Morals existed BEFORE religion was even taught. If anybody needs to plead, its you.

          • Sha-wei

            moral
            adjective
            1. of, pertaining to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong;
            …………………………………………………………………………………………………
            11. morals, principles or habits with respect to right or wrong conduct.

            Dictionary.com Unabridged
            Based on the Random House Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2014.

            moral
            adjective
            1. concerned with or relating to human behaviour, esp the distinction between good and bad or right and wrong
            behaviour: moral sense
            …………………………………………………………………………………………………
            10. (pl) principles of behaviour in accordance with standards of right and wrong.

            Collins English Dictionary – Complete & Unabridged 2012 Digital Edition

            You devious jackal, what new bambosh will you spout next? For with every ensuing utterance churned up by your reprobate mind, you merely CONFIRM AND REINFORCE what has already been said about you. Your latest brimborion, nevertheless, strains even jaded credulity, to wit: “Morals don’t BELONG to God”! So, whose are they? Your spiritual father’s? Yet he undertook, not to simply hand them over to his targets (since they weren’t his to give), but rather, to whisper sly enticements in human ears for the grasping of what solely pertained to the Divine prerogative. It follows, then, that any de facto claim humanity might have over MORAL AUTONOMY is founded on the illegitimate grounds of unlawful appropriation.

            ‘God asked, “Did you eat fruit from the tree from which I commanded you not to eat?”’ ‘Then the Lord God said, “Now
            these human beings HAVE BECOME LIKE ONE OF US and have knowledge of what is good and what is bad (“can now tell the difference between good and evil”). They must not be allowed to take fruit from the tree that gives life, eat it,
            and live forever.”’ Therefore, if you actually believe your own lying words bordering on blasphemy, “Phipps”, you are either the biggest fool in Christendom, a grossly delusional confounder of Christians on these forums, or a totally twisted tergiversator of Holy Writ. As stated before, you have nothing valid to contribute regarding “morals” (or anything else BELONGING TO GOD, for that matter).

          • Phipps Mike

            ““Morals don’t BELONG to God”! So, whose are they?”
            MAN made morals, they are simply rules put in place for quality of life.
            The rest of your tripe which was nothing but fancy words in order to make yourself seem intelligent, I wont address. They are all non-applicable.

          • James Loos

            just stop already. I have read all your comments so far, and you need to reflect inward.
            You vehemently refute anything pertaining to God, which begs the question: why are you on this page? Just to troll?
            Well, you cannot say you have never been told, so believe what you will. You are the one who will have to live with the consequences.

          • Phipps Mike

            hey dummy. its not about going against God, its about not NEEDING God to have morals and going by them, I think you really need to learn how to read or at least COMPREHEND what you are reading. People who use God as a CRUTCH disgust me, they are PATHETIC.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Mike, with all due respect, PLEASE reflect earnestly on what Sha-wei is saying to you. He is lighting a candle for you to see, he is doing it out of love for you, and I, also, truly do fear for your soul. It would be unloving to do otherwise – if Hell exists (and Jesus says it does, more than anyone else in the Bible). I REALLY mean this, sir. I am being 100% sincere. Please reflect on his comments above. I am praying for you right now, because I love you as you are a man created in the Image of God.

            As for the idea that objective moral values and duties can exist without God, even the “pope” and “high priests” of a-theism agree that they can not and do not: https://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/an-atheist-explains-the-real-consequences-of-adopting-an-atheistic-worldview/#comment-101449
            May God bless you with His Light, Mike!

          • Phipps Mike

            so you are professing that ALL ATHEISTS have no morals and do nothing but sin all day. Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
            Morals co-exist between ALL people..religious AND non religious. That is not supposition, its a FACT.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Mike, I am not professing anything: I am letting the a-theist profess, by their own admission, that they cannot ground objective moral values and duties, without God. They are the one saying it: Dawkins, Provine, and Ruse – the high priests of a-theism. Take it up with them. And listen to Sha-wei above. God bless!

          • Phipps Mike

            Atheists have misconceptions that the words “sin” and “morals” come from the Bible. That is NOT the origin of the terms.
            God did not invent the word “moral” and in fact the original scripture was not even IN English. Therefore. the word “moral” and its definition belongs to man. Atheists try too hard and end up looking silly. Why do YOU believe them? At least in as far as who owns what terminology?

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Mike, take it up with the a-theists. I agree 100% with the high priests of a-theism that they cannot ground these objective moral values and duties without God, because God is the Moral Law Giver. A stopped watch is still right twice a day, and so are the a-theists who are intellectually honest about the source of objective morality.
            The bottom line: a-theists have to borrow from theism to make objective moral judgments about anything. They have to “sit in the lap of God in order to slap His face.” (Frank Turek) Minds and morals do not evolve from molecules through monkeys. Are you listening to Sha-wei yet? 🙂

          • Phipps Mike

            World,

            ” because God is the Moral Law Giver.”

            Cavemen did not KNOW God but yet went by their own moral codes. Proof that you don’t need God to go by morals, In case you didn’t know, Morals just means RULES that are made to make quality of life more efficient. I don’t agree with Sha about morals, They are NOT God made…end of story.

          • Tim Raynor

            Mike does make a good point. If you actually read the history of the Nordic tribes (Vikings to most people) for example, you’d learn the majority of them were not into their pagan religion as much as you think. Most of them would be considered atheists in their time, yet they were a tribe of people that were mostly simple farmers and created their own sense of moral laws to govern their community. Sure, it wasn’t anything perfect – what ever is? – but the point is that they did have morality in respect for neighbors, community and their culture around them, and all of it without any great god or magical sky wizard. Plenty of books about ancient cultures making moral societies without god. Just saying people might want to get out to the library more often. 😉

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Mike, I know you are not a Christian, but the reason that even pagans and a-theists can behave in a moral fashion is given quite clearly in Romans 2:15 – every human being has a God-given consciences with the law written on them. (That is why a-theists must sit in the lap of God in order to slap His face.)
            And once again, you and Tim are confusing people behaving morally with being able to ground objective moral values and duties. Those are two entirely separate things. You should know that. The high priests of a-theism – Dawkins, Provine, and Ruse understand the difference: you two should take it up with them. Perhaps they will debate you? 🙂 They know full well that under naturalistic a-theism, objective moral values and duties are illusions, and the a-theists who disagree with them are both deluded and behaving like Christians.
            Next, if morals were man-given, then it was 100% moral to own black people in the 1800’s and to gas Jews in 1930’s Germany, since, in both cases, the legislated morality (the law) allowed for these atrocities. Please feel free to stand on the side of owning black people and gassing Jews. You must if you are an a-theist.
            Finally, let’s test your moral compass: for or against abortion on demand?

          • Phipps Mike

            World,
            I am a Baptist Protestant. That is a Christian denomination.
            I understand that because God MADE us, that it’s the reason we HAVE the capacity to have morals, but he isn’t the one that makes all individuals DISCOVER it. Many people don’t know who God IS so that’s proof that God didn’t help them discover morals. That’s where I am coming from.Morals are never objective,they are brought about by knowing the VALUE of having them. For example: we all know and without God’s help that stealing is wrong because it is taking what somebody worked to get. etc…etc…
            Don’t bring up Hitler in a debate, there’s a name for that practice that makes it a no-no in debate. Anyway, he was a quack so you cant use his ideologies as anything sensible.
            God promoted having slaves so you don’t want to push too hard on that issue.
            Abortion on demand is no different than killing for sport. I disagree with both. I am pro-CHOICE about abortion when it comes to incest, rape, or keeping the mother alive. Other than that, Adoption is the way to go.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Mike, I understand that you claim to be a Baptist protestant, but you certainly do not read your Bible if you don’t realize that God is the Moral Law Giver. (And Baptists, like all other denominations under Protestantism, Catholicism, and Eastern Orthodox Christianity affirm that the Bible is God’s Word.) If God wrote it on the hearts of every single human being (and that’s precisely what He says in Romans 2:15), then they can be a-theists all they want and yet will still have some conscience.
            You say “morals are never objective.” But, when someone mistreats you, you demand objective fairness and justice, right? So, that position is self-refuting in that it is unlivable. It’s like saying “there are no objective truths.” Self-contradictory.
            I have noticed that the ones who object to bringing up Hitler (and slave owners) in a debate never get around to explaining just how the comparison is invalid. Obviously, if man, not God, is the moral law giver, then the laws man gave legalizing owning black people and gassing Jews were moral. That is the point at which your view fails. You would be wise to address it.
            And, once again, no response on the intellectual honesty of Dawkins, Provine, and Ruse when it comes to the inability of an a-theist to ground objective moral values and duties. As Dostoyevsky stated “If there is no God, all things are permissible.” Dawkins, Provine, and Ruse are merely confirming what Dostoyevsky concluded. But, if you can come up with a way to intellectually ground objective moral values and duties without God, then you are most welcome to debate these great a-theists and take them down. 🙂
            You are also free to provide your interpretation of Romans 2:15, but really: a Baptist who doesn’t know that God is the Moral Law Giver?!? I never laughed so hard in my life! Must be a New York City “Baptist” or something. San Francisco “Baptist”? Is that the new A-theist-Baptist denomination I have been hearing about? 🙂

          • Phipps Mike

            World,

            we are sitting here spinning our wheels because you REFUSE to keep a simple premise….simple.

            One line in my last reply revealed the crux of this whole argument: “they are brought about by knowing the VALUE of having them. For example: we all know and without God’s help that stealing is wrong because it is taking what somebody worked to get.”

            It doesn’t get any simpler than that, I am a Des Moines, Iowa Baptist. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that “ALL men who are Godless have NO morals and sin with every action they take.”

            the idea is RIDICULOUS.
            The men you cite are inapplicable because for one, they are atheists and you are not, You claim they are nothing but sinners yet you cite them as credible, Talk about being contradictory!

            Hitler was INSANE, that’s why you cant use his ideologies.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Stealing is most certainly NOT wrong under naturalistic a-theism. It is precisely what is done on a daily basis in the animal kingdom, and to the clear and obvious survival benefit of the one who successfully steals. (It’s also a favorite of Democrats: it’s called “wealth re-distribution.”) This is what the intellectually honest a-theists know that you do not. And again, you are confusing a person’s ability to act in a moral manner (Romans 2:15) with their ability to ground objective moral values and duties. Two completely different concepts.

            You are attributing statements to me that I didn’t make. That is a sign of a very poor argument.

            I see that there is no answer on Romans 2:15 again. Nor is there any reply on the slavery issue. Here is a supplementary post on slavery that might be of benefit: http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2014/06/08/can-atheists-condemn-slavery-as-immoral-do-atheists-believe-that-slavery-is-wrong-2/ God bless!

          • Phipps Mike

            World,

            animals don’t have a higher consciousness to be compared to humans in as far as stealing OR atheism…lol

            Just like Jeff Goldblum said on The Fly…insects don’t have politics, neither do animals.

            You go by Gods word so think about the premise of Jubilee before you go and consider wealth redistribution as “stealing”.

            Its in the Bible that if a man comes to your door hungry…feed him.

            Even the three wise men gave gifts to Jesus when he was born. No cash register around to charge Jesus for the presents.

            You say I am putting words in your mouth, not true. By saying that atheists don’t have morals is the same as saying: “ALL men who are Godless have NO morals and sin with every action they take.”

            “then the laws man gave legalizing owning black people and gassing Jews were moral.”

            Hitler made the laws about gassing and so like I said earlier. Hitler was insane so it doesn’t count. I already addressed the slave issue by telling you not to touch that since God promoted slavery. Therefore, if you say God IS the morals, he is being immoral by making slavery OK. So you cant blame men for that.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            “animals don’t have a higher consciousness to be compared to humans in as far as stealing OR atheism” Naturalistic a-theism does not recognize any difference whatsoever amongst humans and animals when it comes to moral behavior. Dawkins, Provine, and Ruse admit this and all serious Christians agree with them. Point refuted.

            “You go by Gods word so think about the premise of Jubilee before you go and consider wealth redistribution as “stealing”.
            Its in the Bible that if a man comes to your door hungry…feed him. Even the three wise men gave gifts to Jesus when he was born. No cash register around to charge Jesus for the presents.”

            Not one of the examples you provide is government – enforced wealth re-distribution. Each of these are examples of time and treasure freely given and freely received – the opposite of big government Nanny State wealth-redistribution. I serve God, not man – the opposite of liberals. If godless liberal policies worked, we would not have been in a 50 year poverty record high these past 3 years. It has been proven that conservative Christians donate more time and treasure to charitable works than liberal a-theists: http://winteryknight.wordpress.com/2014/01/17/is-giving-to-charity-more-rational-for-religious-people-or-atheists/
            Point refuted.

            “You say I am putting words in your mouth, not true. By saying that atheists don’t have morals is the same as saying: “ALL men who are Godless have NO morals and sin with every action they take.”” Nowhere did I say that a-theists could not behave morally: I said that they cannot ground objective moral values and duties. You are obviously not intelligent enough to know the difference, but Dawkins, Provine, and Ruse do. As does any Christian who has read the Bible. You just proved you put words in my mouth. Point refuted.

            Finally, since you can’t find your Bible: “They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.” Romans 2:15

            I am begging you to listen to Sha-wei above: get right with God, Mike – you cannot serve the devil of death and the God of Life at the same time. Sha-wei’s admonition bears repeating:

            “Immeasurably less of an authority on God’s Word are you, “Phipps”, as you attempt once more to play both sides of the field (for us to drop our guard), after the manner of your master the Devil. For you are NO Christian, “Phipps”, and your true allegiance to your Dark Lord surfaces irremediably in the positions you take. As such, you have NOTHING of worth to contribute to any discussion on “morals”.

            And thus, “you can have no part or share in God’s word because your heart isn’t right with God. Therefore, change your heart and life! Turn from your wickedness! Plead with the Lord in the hope that your wicked intent can be forgiven, for I see that your bitterness has poisoned you and evil has you in chains.” Indeed, “Phipps”, that you are in bondage is painfully obvious, but there is ONE who came to free us from spiritual slavery. Heed the warning while you can, as I did.”

          • Phipps Mike

            “Naturalistic a-theism does not recognize any difference whatsoever amongst humans and animals when it comes to moral behavior.”

            animals have MORALS? bwahahahahahahahaha!!!! now its MY turn to laugh. You have become stupid in your desperation.

            Jubilee was COMMANDED by God, it was most DEFINITELY not free will donations.

            “It has been proven that conservative Christians donate more time and treasure to charitable works than liberal a-theists:”

            not time, maybe money because for the most part, Liberals are the poor. Republicans are the rich hoity toity who secretly wish death to blacks and poor people.

            You are hopeless and selfish, time to agree to disagree, Scrooge.

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Sha-wei and I did our best. Enjoy your eternity in Hell.

          • Sha-wei

            Thank you for the vote of confidence, brother, but as the Eternal said of Yahshua: “This is my beloved Son: hear HIM”.

            “I’m just a stupid man.”
            – ‘Simon Peter’ in Jesus of Nazareth (1977)

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Amen! But, you are doing such an excellent job of being salt and light in an ever-darkening world – keep up the great work, Brother!

    • James Loos

      Your arguments are inconsistent. At one point you defend, and now you condemn.

      • Phipps Mike

        James Loos….do you ever stop being stupid? my point that you keep having a problem with read as follows: “you have absolutely NO idea of the religious beliefs of that Uncle and Niece. ”
        Since you have no skills in using your brain, I will translate:
        GOD HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR DECISION EITHER WAY.
        They could be Christians for all you or Reason2012 knows end of story. Take off the uniform since you don’t defend the Constitution for what it really is about: FREEDOM OF RELIGION. That’s why we founded/settled here in America, to escape the monarchy of the King, you dolt.

  • Gary

    If they were both men, or women, there would have been no debate at all. The court would have ruled unanimously for their marriage. And this won’t be the last incestuous marriage. Soon all of the requirements for marriage will be removed.

  • ArmedAmerican

    “Im my own grandpa…..Im my own grampa”

    puke….

  • Reason2012

    According to the ruling, while “parent-child and brother-sister marriages . . . are grounded in the almost universal horror with which such marriages are viewed . . . there is no comparably strong objection to uncle-niece marriages.”

    Male on male marriage used to be “grounded in almost universal horror” as well, but indoctrination can change this. Won’t be long before adult with his/her parent or adult male with his adult brother will no longer be “grounded in almost universal horror” either.

    As we remove God, the legal promotion of every perversion under the sun gains steam.

    May this be a call to people to realize God is calling us to have a change of heart about sin in our life and trust only in Christ to be saved – you are witnessing the real state of humanity where God is removed from our lives. You can now see why God judges such behavior, and as it only spreads to more and more depraved behavior being “normal”. Now you can see why God judges such behavior to begin with.

    • Phipps Mike

      you have absolutely NO idea of the religious beliefs of that Uncle and Niece. Supposition does not display anything.

      • Reason2012

        Hello. Their religious beliefs mean nothing to the FACT that they are promoting yet another anti-God perversion and I never said anything about their beliefs. But that perversion they insist be legally enforced as normal used to also be considered “grounded in almost universal horror” just like homosexuality was. Won’t be long before all perversions under the sun are considered just fine. We can see now more and more why God’s judgment is right.

        • Phipps Mike

          sure it does, you sin…right? does that make YOU “Godless”? I am not justifying their marriage but I am pointing out that most self professed pious people claim to be the only ones with God when they sin, themselves. So it is hypocritical to say that they are without God just because they sin.

          You sure have no faith in the human race ( before all perversions under the sun are considered just fine.)

          • Reason2012

            Hello. Me trying to pass laws that legally promote acts that are deemed sin is the difference here, Mike. Yes we sin. But we hate sin and we try to change – we don’t instead pass laws to make that sin ok and think that means God will be ok with it.

          • Tim Raynor

            But in the United States we don’t pass laws based on Biblical theory of sin. Not everyone in the country believes in religious dogmas, nor believes in the concept of sin. The Bible doesn’t rule the US, the Constitution does.

          • Reason2012

            Hello. Of course we don’t pass laws based on God’s Word – it’s why it’s perfectly legal to_kill your son/daughter if you couldn’t be bothered raising him or her… they call it abortion and claim it’s perfectly good. 55 MILLION sons/daughters killed in the name of “we believe we’re animals, don’t REALLY believe in God” with over a million more slain each year – one more reasons we need to get back to the truth of God.

      • James Loos

        Your vehement defense speaks of a desire to marry your niece. If that is not the case, then try a little perspective, and stop advocating abhorrent behavior.

        • Phipps Mike

          Hey dummy, before you spout off. learn to see my position before you spread your ignorance. I said down below in the comments…PRIOR to the one above, ” they are STILL half blood and the fact of their ROLES are in question. Its wrong morally to marry a family member, even if they are “step”.
          So no, I don’t advocate marrying nieces…idiot. I was going against Reason2012’s notion that if you don’t have God, its the only reason this could happen. AKA giving God credit for EVERYTHING when God has nothing to do with it or not. People don’t NEED God to have morals. In my own personal experience, I find that there are many more NON religious good people than there are, religious.

  • Jack Rohde

    One more step into the pit, then the next step and so on, while we remove each sin, because there is no God , and so there is no more sin, go for it pagans see where it get’s you.

  • robertzaccour

    We’ve had same sex marriage for years so this really doesn’t surprise me. Sad days we live in.

  • Pamela Hankins

    Interesting thing…Look at the Scripture all you who judge. Judge righteously. Yes, Leviticus does say that certain relationships are forbidden under the Mosaic Law, however, we are dead to the Law that we might be married to another (Christ). So, firstly, do your research on how Gentile Christians are to live regarding said Law. The entire Book of Romans is written to the Gentiles to answer that question, along with Galatians and others. The Book of Hebrews was written to answer that question for Jewish Christians. You need to understand the foundation and remember that Paul, a “Hebrew of Hebrews” was the one called by God to answer these questions. Okay, now…Look at the Fathers of our faith! Abraham was married to his half sister (Gen 20). Issac and Jacob both married cousins. There are many other examples to include examples of other relationships not sanctioned by the Law, for instance Boaz married Ruth who was a Moabitess, which was unlawful. Peter and Paul went round and round regarding the Law, but then Peter was shown a vision and required to reconsider what God considers clean and unclean. The bottom line for Christians is to have a hear that is open and yielded to God and willing to follow Him just like when Abraham was asked to offer Issac, (the Promise of God) up to the Lord. What! Yet, this is the way that God dealt with Abraham to see what was in his heart if he would obey God or not, and it was counted to him for righteousness. Things are not always the way we have been taught that they should be…USUALLY not! After having said all this, there will be those who think we simply what to do what we want to do and pervert God’s Word to do it. We will all stand before the Judgement seat to give account. Those to whom the Lord said…”well done, thou good and faithful servant” are depicted as not knowing when they did the things the Lord said they did! But, those to whom the Lord said, “Depart from me…I never knew you” had all kinds of things to say about what they had done for Him. Hmmmm. My experience has been that the very ‘christians’ who so vehemently judge others are the very same ones, who judging BY the Law, are so quick to break it in ways not so controversial in public opinion, such as divorce, fornication, pornography, gossip, backbiting, and general viciousness. Our judgement needs to begin with ourselves by looking into the mirror of the Word of God, and begging for God’s cleansing that we might walk humbly before Him, no matter what others may say or do. What God says will always agree with His Word, for He has magnified His Word above His Name. The problem is we are conditioned to believe all kinds of things from the time we are children, both religious things and secular things, that are patently false. If we are willing to do the research, we will usually be surprised. I was and am…constantly. Every time I go back into the Scripture, I see something I did not see before, and as I research the original languages (which I have been doing for forty plus years) the Word opens up even more. Many can regurgitate their sunday school lessons and the Scriptures used within their particular denominations regarding Salvation and faith, but those who are of full age have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. I am NOT condoning questionable relationships, I am simply saying that before you judge, you should research and perhaps, you will find yourself having to shut up and learn a little more. Opinions are poison unless they are firmly rooted and grounded in the Truth of the precious Word of God.

    • Gary

      Can you refer me to any Biblical passage that indicates that marriage is supposed to be anything other than the union of a man and a woman as husband and wife? If you can, then I will consider it. If you cannot, then how can you justify same-sex marriage?

      • Pamela Hankins

        Homosexuality

        Thursday,
        August 28, 2014

        1:24 PM

        A disturbing
        broadcast today made a distinction between Paul’s condemnation of homosexuality
        and being lustful,

        stating that Paul
        was only condemning lustful relationships, and not loving relationships between
        two men or two women.

        Several things need
        to be pointed out. Firstly, there needs to be an understanding of several
        things:

        The Scriptural definition and
        depiction of marriage and how it
        relates to our present lives.

        Cultural differences between
        the present time and the Biblical era and how our understanding is skewed
        by the present culture.

        Exactness of the meaning of
        different languages (being Hebrew in the OT and Greek in the NT; see the
        enclosed links).

        Long before the Mosaic Law
        was established, marriage was defined in Genesis 2:18-24, ” And the
        Lord God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make
        him an help meet for him. 19 And out of the ground the Lord God formed
        every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air; and brought them unto
        Adam to see what he would call them: and whatsoever Adam called every
        living creature, that was the name thereof. 20 And Adam gave names to all
        cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but
        for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 21 And the Lord God
        caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of
        his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 22 and the rib, which
        the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the
        man. 23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my
        flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man. 24
        Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave
        unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” Understanding this
        passage is key to our understanding of this entire matter. First, Adam is
        made in the image of God and so represents God. He is God’s living analogy
        of Himself for the human race. A such, He, not wanting to be alone,
        creates mankind and begins to tell a sacred Story using the pictures of
        their lives. Adam, as the first man is also alone. Although there are many
        other living creatures, none meet his need for a companion. So, God brings
        a bride out of Adam’s side. This is a foreshadowing of what God is about
        to do using His Creature…He is going to bring about a companion for
        Himself that is compatible for Him…His Bride. So, marriage, as defined
        here in Gen 2, is between a man and a woman. This pattern is repeated
        throughout the Scriptures, never varying. Men, even God’s men, pushed the
        envelope by marrying more than one woman, but, although they were not
        remanded for this, the Spiritual Bride is always spoken of as being One
        Bride, not many brides, and again, the marriage covenant reveals and
        reflects His relationship to mankind as a
        Husband/husbandman/lover/protector.

        The Word of God is clear in
        the NT as well. Putting the emphasis on the idea of lust vs
        “love”, does not change the fact that the Scripture clearly
        condemns men laying with men. Romans 1:26-32, ” For this cause God
        gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the
        natural use into that which is against nature: 27 and likewise also the
        men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward
        another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in
        themselves that recompense of their error which was meet. 28 And even as
        they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to
        a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; 29 being
        filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness,
        maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity;
        whisperers, 30 backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters,
        inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding,
        covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: 32
        who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are
        worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do
        them.”. There is no such thing as a sexual, (long-term relationship,
        or not) between men that is not condemned by the living God. He concludes
        that matter as lustful, not as loving. Our opinions do not change His
        Word. Rightly dividing the Word of God requires a heart after God, not a
        desire to prove a matter one way or the other. That is why understanding
        what the Scripture has to say about marriage is fundamental. The
        Scriptures taken disjointedly can be made to say whatever we want them to
        say. Our heart is the problem. It must be prostrated before God. From that
        state He will search us and try us. He will reveal to us what really lies
        there. Psalm 139 is the perfect example of this, starting out with, vs 1,
        ” O Lord, thou hast searched me, and known me” and ending with
        vs 23 & 24, “Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and
        know my thoughts: and see if there
        be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting”.
        Remember that this Psalm was written by the man God said was after His own
        heart. And let us remember the ‘victim’ in this scenario. The person
        assuming the female role…who bends over to present his body to another
        man, is being hurt physically. Both are subject to the diseases resulting
        from anal sex, but he alone is also subject to the physical pain of the
        encounter. Why would someone take such a position? It could be compared
        with any other abusive action. For whatever reason a man puts himself in
        such a situation, it should not be overlooked and subsequently receive the
        blessing of a blissfully ignorant and removed society. We don’t
        blissfully, and ignorantly, let girls and women be subjugated by an
        abusive relationship if we know what is happening! Subjugation of weaker
        people, and hateful abuse is rampant in human history. Why do we tolerate
        this particular arrangement when we KNOW what the health consequences are?

        Anything
        and everything can be justified by using Scripture. If the intent of the heart
        is to justify one’s self a Scripture can certainly be found to do so. That is
        why the Scripture says to rightly divide
        the Word of Truth. A heart that is willing to go God’s way is required to see
        clearly…any other bent will skew the meaning. So, I say to every soul…are you
        as willing to go right as you are to go left? Or to go up as you are to go
        down? Will you insist that God’s answer agree with your desires, or will you
        insist only to hear what He actually has to say?

        Many
        will say Lord, Lord, in that Day of Judgment, citing ‘godly’ deeds and actions,
        but He will not acknowledge them. This is the ‘way of Cain’. Cain did it his
        way. He knew what God required of him, but did not agree with Him. He would
        have had to go to his younger brother to procure a blood sacrifice, and he
        would not. So, he reasoned within himself that he would give God the best of
        his produce. When God did not acknowledge his sacrifice he became extremely
        angry and ultimately gave God the blood sacrifice, didn’t he? You want blood,
        here’s Abel’s blood…here ya go. That is what is revealed in the heart of those
        who subtly want their own way…they justify it by any means available, and if
        anyone says anything to the contrary they’re gonna get real angry. Hate is
        murder. Romans 1:18-25, “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven
        against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in
        unrighteousness; 19 because that which may be known of God is manifest in them;
        for God hath shewed it unto them. 20 For the invisible things of him from the
        creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are
        made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: 21
        because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were
        thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was
        darkened. 22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, 23 and
        changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to
        corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. 24
        Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own
        hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: 25 who changed the
        truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the
        Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” Isaiah 53:6, “All we like
        sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord
        hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” I John 3:11-17, “11 For
        this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one
        another. 12 Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And
        wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother’s
        righteous. 13 Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you. 14 We know that
        we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren. He that
        loveth not his brother abideth in death. 15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a
        murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him. 16
        Hereby perceive we the love of God, because he laid down his life for us: and
        we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren. 17 But whoso hath this world’s
        good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion
        from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?”.

        If
        you feel like you were ‘born that way’, you are invited to be born again, not
        of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible. Remember too, that we all, being
        born sinners were born as thieves, liars, cheaters, whatever the case may be.
        If you can use ‘I was born that way’ as an excuse, so can everyone else.

        Please read the Companion
        Bible preface in order to understand this material.

        http://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/PREFACE.htm

        Then,
        armed with a newfound understanding you did not possess before, look at Romans
        the first chapter.

        http://www.companionbiblecondensed.com/NT/Romans.pdf

    • Phipps Mike

      ” The problem is we are conditioned to believe all kinds of things from the time we are children, both religious things and secular things, that are patently false. If we are willing to do the research, we will usually be surprised. I was and am…constantly. Every time I go back into the Scripture, I see something I did not see before, and as I research the original languages (which I have been doing for forty plus years) the Word opens up even more. Many can regurgitate their sunday school lessons and the Scriptures used within their particular denominations regarding Salvation and faith, but those who are of full age have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil. ”

      99.9% of all of the so called pious Christians in this site need to get this through their heads. Especially the quacky fundamentalists.

      • Pamela Hankins

        Thanks, I totally agree, obviously.

        • WorldGoneCrazy

          Sounds like you are both judging those of us who disagree with you. 🙂 So, who are the colossal Pharisees now?!? Please do not fall for the old “it’s wrong to judge” self-refutation. Let’s not make God out to be a liar. Here is a primer on the false doctrine invading the Church, the so-called “you shouldn’t judge” heresy, so fashionable these days:

          http://www.str.org/articles/the-judgment-on-judging#.VFZaRcJ0xol

          Finally, you make the patently absurd and self-refuting statement above: “Things are not always the way we have been taught that they should be…USUALLY not!” Are you not “teaching” us this?!? Can we apply your rule to your own statement?!? if so, we would have to conclude that your teaching is false.
          Please leave the post-modern, post-shame “church,” and may God bless you abundantly!

          • Pamela Hankins

            1 Corinthians 2:15, “But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.”
            1 Corinthians 4:3-5, “But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.
            For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God.”
            1 Corinthians 6:2, “Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?”
            1 Corinthians 6:3&4, “Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.”

          • WorldGoneCrazy

            Looks like this is more applicable to the article at hand:
            1 Corinthians 5:
            ‘It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this? 3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. 4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh,[a][b] so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

            6 Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

            9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[c] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

            12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.” ‘

          • Pamela Hankins

            After reading Acts 21 and looking at the original language the four stipulations given by the Apostles to the Gentile believers included abstaining from fornication. The word originally pointed back to the Lev 18 account, but reading further, apparently there were so many close marriage relationships, especially in Asia, that they limited the meaning to sexual relationships outside of marriage and to homosexual relationships. The burden of the Mosaic law was not to be placed on Gentile believers. That’s why Paul was constantly in so much trouble. In the verses you cited above the sin is defined in the first verse and upheld in the Gen 35 story of Reuben laying with his father’s concubine. As the I Cor 5 states…even pagans don’t do that. All of the rest holds. The Scripture is so vast we must approach it intimately, with the Lord to guide us into all truth, and to obey Him. Remember that the spirit of the law is love. Faith works by love and without faith it is impossible to please Him. It is difficult to express these things to someone who is a stranger and not familiar with my way of life and vice versa. Our liberty in Christ is not a reason to indulge the flesh. Quite the opposite. As we surrender to His examination of our hearts and agree with Him, He has promised to correct us if we are in anything otherwise minded. Nothing frightens me more than the possibility of being the victim of my own imagination. So, I am constantly before the Lord asking Him to search me and try me, to lead me in the Way everlasting. If we all do that, we will find ourselves growing in grace and in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus. But, it is not of him that willeth, but of God that showeth mercy. We are cast on Him. Students of the Word, waiting and watching for Him. Not everyone agrees. Many presumptuously run when He has not commanded. And many, such as the Sadducees and Pharisees know the Word, and yet do not recognize Him. The Israelites in the wilderness are a similar example. God was in their midst and yet they died in the wilderness because of their unbelief. That is where I will leave it. He has magnified His Word above His Name, He is the Word made flesh, but without that intimacy with Him, it remains veiled. It is spiritually discerned.

  • Mary Lincoln

    Remember they are Making their Decisions by this World Laws, Not By Gods Laws. So Anything Will Fly in this World. Satan Children Will Live By Perversion, Not By God Spirituals Laws…Don’t be Surprised by what the World does, because as time goes on it will Wax More Evil..Just Be ready to Face More and More of these kinds of things. When You Remove God Out of any Country, Who Takes Over. Right Satan, He Works through Wicked Unsaved Humans.

  • gatekeeper96740

    And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge,

    God gave them over to a reprobate mind,

    to do those things which are not convenient;Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness,
    covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit,
    malignity; whisperers,Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,Without understanding, covenant-breakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are
    worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do
    them.

    Yeah sounds like modern day America…………….

  • http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/ Ted R. Weiland

    For those who want to abolish Yahweh’s immutable moral law under the New Covenant, you have no moral reason to oppose this union, any more than you do one between a man and a donkey.

    For more on how Yahweh’s triune moral law ( His commandments, statutes, and judgments, including Leviticus 18:11-12, 23 & 20:15), see free online book “Law and Kingdom: Their Relevance Under the New Covenant” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/law-kingdomFrame.html.

  • Lagil

    “I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She’s a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleaned the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?”

    Exodus 35:2
    “On six days work may be done, but the seventh day shall be sacred to you as the sabbath of complete rest to the LORD. Anyone who does work on that day shall be put to death.”
    “My chief of staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?”
    Leviticus 11
    7and the pig, which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you.
    8Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you.” “Here’s one that’s really important cause we’ve got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7 If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?
    “Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother, John, for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

  • Sandra Shill

    “I’m interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She’s a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleaned the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?”

    Exodus 35:2
    “On six days work may be done, but the seventh day shall be sacred to you as the sabbath of complete rest to the LORD. Anyone who does work on that day shall be put to death.”
    “My chief of staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?”
    Leviticus 11
    7and the pig, which does indeed have hoofs and is cloven-footed, but does not chew the cud and is therefore unclean for you.
    8Their flesh you shall not eat, and their dead bodies you shall not touch; they are unclean for you.” “Here’s one that’s really important cause we’ve got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7 If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?
    “Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother, John, for planting different crops side by side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

    • Matt

      You again. Are you going to copy and paste the post you got from a homosexual site all over the internet? Why do you troll Christian sites?

  • WorldGoneCrazy

    Here is a discussion of another incestuous relationship – and one where there is absolutely no risk of genetic defects (stepmother and her stepson), yet, which Paul strongly condemns. Furthermore, he condemns the Corinthian Church for NOT condemning this relationship. How much clearer can this be to the brethren?!?
    1 Corinthians 5:
    ‘It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that even pagans do not tolerate: A man is sleeping with his father’s wife. 2 And you are proud! Shouldn’t you rather have gone into mourning and have put out of your fellowship the man who has been doing this? 3 For my part, even though I am not physically present, I am with you in spirit. As one who is present with you in this way, I have already passed judgment in the name of our Lord Jesus on the one who has been doing this. 4 So when you are assembled and I am with you in spirit, and the power of our Lord Jesus is present, 5 hand this man over to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved on the day of the Lord.

    6 Your boasting is not good. Don’t you know that a little yeast leavens the whole batch of dough? 7 Get rid of the old yeast, so that you may be a new unleavened batch—as you really are. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed. 8 Therefore let us keep the Festival, not with the old bread leavened with malice and wickedness, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.

    9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.

    12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. “Expel the wicked person from among you.” ‘

  • Bob

    ANY judaized christian out there, think before you speak;
    I John 3.4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.