Sarah Palin’s son filing for divorce, libs celebrate

According to the National Enquirer, Sarah Palin’s son, Track, and his wife have filed for divorce in Alaskan court:

Track and Britta Palin jointly filed in an Alaskan court.

Under the 49th State’s marriage code, by filing jointly, they are telling the courts they have settled custody issues and settlement claims.

According to reports, the agreement says Track and his wife must watch a nearly hour-long video on “How to Explain Mommy and Daddy Are Getting a Divorce” to the child.

They were married back in May, 2011 and have a 1 year old child named Kyla. I’ve not read any reports that detail why they are getting a divorce, but it doesn’t matter. The libs will still use it to attack the Palins as they always do.

Twitchy has already posted a few celebrations from libnuts on twitter.

In other news, Democrat Congressman Jim Moran’s son found guilty of beating up his girlfriend.

Comment Policy: Please read our comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.

To our ad-free users: I apologize for the ad below but unfortunately DISQUS requires this ad in order to use their commenting system and I cannot make it go away.

327 thoughts on “Sarah Palin’s son filing for divorce, libs celebrate

  1. Wow…they weren’t married very long. Not even long enough to try to work things out, but it’s not like our society respects marriage these days.

    Sometimes I think signing the paper (getting married) does “funny things” to people. I hope these two maintain a civil relationship for the sake of their child.

  2. What does this have to do with Sarah Palin, or Todd, or Bristol, or Willow, or Piper?…
    The Palin family is not HIVE.. liberals have a HIVE mentality.. but produce zero honey..

  3. Great to see everyone pulling for MiketheMarine to find a gal. I suspect we wouldn’t see this on the Left.

    Mike, I met my bride in church 12 years ago at 30 years old, when I thought marriage wasn’t part of the plan. Keep the faith, brother.

  4. The lamestream media jumped all over this. How many liberals have been divorced, we never hear anything about that from the media do we?

  5. WOW!!! look at all the comments on the palins compared to the other articles here. They are popular… Ill give them that!

  6. in some cases its good to wait until 30 to get married. maybe this was one of them. maturity and selflessness that isnt there sometimes under the age of 30 is needed when there are children involved

  7. Oh, my God, this must be the worst thing to ever happen in 2012! I have forgotten all about losing my Constitution and seeing our Republic disappear. Do we still have an emperor in the White Palace or has that ended because of this big news story? I thought Sarah Palin was insignificant. Will the NYT have a cover story on this important event?

  8. This has been a disruptive evening. One I did not enjoy. I hope further conversations will restore the dignity of the dialogue here on TRS.

  9. I really don’t understand why any of you like Palin. She has to be the dumbest woman in American politics. At least Clinton and Rice would intelligent, cunning and competent. Palin is the typical mindless, empty-headed woman. VP? Are you people insane?

  10. This is a general post to all of TRS. We are gradually being invaded by Leftist infiltrators. Some are amateurs, some are skilled in what they do. No real emergency, just be alert.

    Liberals don’t like this site. They will do anything they can, to destroy it. Pay particular attention to people who appear to be Conservative, but argue against the basic ideals of Conservatism. Just watch what they say, and how they say it.

      1. Well, if that’s the case, badlibs, then you are watching me, watching you. I don’t know exactly, what lit your fire, but I’m sure here to keep it burning for you. You tell me, where we go from here.

        1. I took offense to you saying to another conservative they made you “sick”. You can disagree, but you didn’t even do that, you just said they made you sick.
          You seemed to agree with this:

          wodiej reply to Brian Burlingame

          Couldn’t agree more. Conservatives lose because they exhibit judgmental, self righteous attitudes towards ohers.

          But, whatever….I don’t have time for this stuff.

          1. I took your comment to heart. You were right. I went back and read through the posts again, and the comment I made toward ssenecal5000, was inappropriate, so I apologized to her/him. Don’t know the gender. That apology extends to you.

            Sometimes, I get so angry at what the Liberals get away with, that that anger spills over to a Conservative, who I may disagree with, on a minor issue.

            Making comments is easy. Taking them back, is a tad more difficult. I will try to be more careful in the future. You’re a veteran here, and veterans carry respect. It’s understood.

      1. Brian, do you know the true definition of Fascism? It has been discussed at length on this site. You’re one of the good guys, and I’m not here to make life difficult for you. But there are just as many Liberals on this site, as there are Conservatives.

  11. Dreadful news. Once a person embarks down this course of treachery (putting space between yourself & your spouse), repentence is extremely rare. The apostate church will support both of them in the pursuit of an adulterous union, but the scriptures condemn such persons nonetheless. Jesus respects no mans person, and His Words will be enough to condemn all who continue in disobedience;

    And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery. (Mar 10:10-12)

  12. Absolutely heartbreaking. Track Palin served his country in Iraq and Afghanistan and gets mocked by liberals. Why, because he’s Sarah Palin’s son? These people have no heart or soul. The internet has desensitized people to reality. I wish only the best for this wonderful family.

  13. I am amazed that this simple post by Scoop about Track Palin and his wife separating, has been able to generate almost two hundred comments. That, in itself, is something to think about.

    The fact that these two young people cared so little, for the institution of marriage, to dissolve it so quickly, is a sadness to all of us. We didn’t used to be like that, as a country. We didn’t used to be like that, as a people.

    Sarah, and her husband, Todd, will survive this, because they are strong people. Their hearts are hurting right now, and my heart hurts with them.

    You do what you can, to raise your children as best you can. You try to instill in them, the values your parents instilled in you. But the world is such a different place right now, than when you and I were growing up. The Progressives have done a great job of changing the world we live in.

    I don’t believe our Beloved Sarah has a political career, going forward. I still held out hope, until this. This pretty much sealed the deal. The children that she and Todd, loved so much, took her out of the political arena, for good. Both had failed relationships, and the Liberals will take that to the bank.

    She will still remain to me, the one shining example of what Conservative thought, and the idea of Freedom means. I have so much love for her, I find it hard to express.

    1. Time to break out your Bible.
      Divorce is in there and its not immoral.
      Immoral is not getting married and the man going around planting his seed in this or that risking the creation of a fatherless child
      Sure its sad that they are going thier seperate ways, but that is not immoral.
      The purpose of marriage worked as it was designed to. Track’s child knows him and Track is legally responsible for his welfare
      If Track doesnt live up to his responsiblity , then that’s immoral.

      Immoral does not mean suffer . It meaans doing the right thing.

      Your comments about this ending Sarah’s poltical career are just idiotic.

      1. Well, ssenecal, while that was a great suggestion, I actually don’t have to break out my Bible. Because it’s always there, on my bedside table. Perhaps you should consider putting yours there, too.

        You scared me for a moment there, so I went back and looked at my comment again.
        Sure enough, the word, “immoral,” did not appear in my comment.

        What I did mention in my comment, was that I was sad, that these two young people did not have more respect for the institution of marriage.

        “The purpose of marriage worked as it was designed to.” Really? The purpose of marriage is to live together for one year, have a child and then get a divorce? That’s the purpose of marriage, as you see it? I hope you are not ministering to any young couples in your church, who are thinking about getting married. Because as a youth counselor, you are an unmitigated disaster.

        As for the effect of all this on Sarah’s political career, I just love being called an Idiot by a fellow Scooper. As members of the The Right Scoop, we just love when that happens. You must feel really proud.

  14. How much more tragedy does this family have to suffer at the hands of Liberals and the media? They’re just human beings, for God’s sakes. They are not that much different from you and I, except for one thing. They have no privacy.

  15. I don’t care if they are getting a divorce or not. At least they were married by the time that sweet baby did arrive.

  16. Divorce has been too cheap since the 1960’s. Now our culture has cheapened marriage.

    I wish they had not done this. Studies have shown that it doesn’t really help to wait until your kids are grown to have a divorce; it still affects them deeply.

    My wife and I made a deal that if we grew apart, we’d simply get a bigger house and live at opposite ends, but we’d stay together and show up to events together until we died.
    The other part of the deal was an exception: if either one of us became an alcoholic, then it was over for good, no second chances.

    The good news is we’re still close. Someday I’ll write about it.

    But we see people throwing away marriages for some of the most ridiculous reasons. Money troubles, work hours, overseas deployments, mothers in law, politics, illness, you name it. All of those can be endured. But young people often have no patience.

    I know many of my good conservative and libertarian friends have been through divorce, and I hope those of you who have had to deal with it have found peace. But I think we have lost this battle over the old concept of marriage. And frankly, good riddance. It was corrupted long ago, and has been worthless, as a civil institution, since then.

    Wait! What did he say?

    Bear with me.

    What held society together since the corruption of marriage long ago (I don’t care to place exactly when) has been good people, faith, and love. Marriage, as an institution, hasn’t done a thing. It’s been turned into an economic status, and not a civil one (and I don’t mean the legal term). Bargaining has been done, trading tax favor for marriage status, and welfare benefits are based on it, too. The institution has been debased. However, a few decent leftists have managed to stay in long-term relationships with someone without being married. Some on the right have done so, as well. Even though signing up on the government’s lists as being married can save you some dough, and maybe bring you some free government cheese.

    But the institution of marriage as envisioned by your priest, pastor, or rabbi is a construct that the state refuses to recognize. The discordance between the original idea of “a union before God,” and that of “a societal unit with certain legal privileges and responsibilities” has led to people proposing to become “married” to anyone or anything at all. Once that idea has taken hold, the word “marriage” has been rendered meaningless.

    I propose a convocation of the heads of the various religious orders for the purpose of creating a new institution. One which exists only before God, and one for which the church recognizes no governmental interference with its sanction. As a working name for now, I’ve been calling it “Sanctified Union.” I’m not happy with the term, but it’s a handle to work with.

    A sanctified union would only be recognized by the church if performed by a member of the clergy (and I do not mean strictly Christian clergy, here—a rabbi or other recognized clergy within any religion would work**). A sanctified union would be a union before God, for the purpose of becoming husband and wife, so that children, if they be brought forth, would be raised within a strong parental union.

    Am I selling Christianity here? Not exactly. I’m saying that we should begin, as our inalienable right, to refuse recognition of the state’s ability to make laws regarding such a union. Within such a model, a sanctified union can be made by non-believers, just as it has long been possible, provided they commit to the requirements of the union itself.++

    The church (as in the religious orders who make this accord) would have some responsibilities here. First, the church must steadfastly ignore any other phony institutions called “marriage”—or any other pretentious term—that does not comply with the standards set forth in the accord. Next, the church must offer terms of divorce and annulment that are well thought out, and are designed only to protect the institution itself, while providing for the safety and security of any abused spouse. (This would require the church to boldly label an abuser as such, and make it known in public, until such a person redeems him or her self.) The church must require the state to recognize such a union, and it must continually work to be certain that such a union is recognized as the best possible choice for the nurturing of children.

    We need something like this to reclaim parental rights, and stop the state from encroaching in that area. It will require something of the order of the Constitution itself in order to work. And it can work across religious boundaries, including Christians, Hindus, Jews, Ba-Hai, and many other faiths.

    If we don’t do something like this, governments will take control of raising children. I wonder what you folks think about it.


    **At some point folks, we’re going to have to define legitimate religions. I can offer at least one qualifier: any religion which commands people to kill unbelievers is not legitimate. I think we can come up with a few more without harming the fun for leftists who like to make up bogus religions around crystals and astral planes.

    ++In fact, special accommodation can be made for same-sex unions, provided it isn’t called the same thing, and they don’t call themselves husband, wife, mom, or dad. No child should be forced to deal with confusion over what the term “Dad” means. I’m all for letting our homosexual friends and family “be together” without having to hide or be bullied for it. But they should recognize they are in a relationship that has nothing to do with marriage, or as I would call it, a sanctified union of a man and woman. We can give them status as a civil union, and treat them with dignity. But we don’t have to corrupt the vitally necessary (for society’s sake) union of a man and woman in order to do so.

    1. My dear homosexuals aren’t interested in civil unions. That has been voted in repeatedly. Twice in California before Prop 8. What homosexuals want is to be told that homosexuality is normal.

      Not gonna happen. Homosexuals need to make up their minds whether they want to be considered ‘special’ with extra privileges and status. Protected class and voting block. Or normal with no privileges like the rest of us. Being a minority means you are outside the normal or median. If homosexuality was/is normal then they wouldn’t be a minority would they?

      And while I can treat someone with dignity I will never applaud or encourage detrimental behavior.

      1. I disagree. Many are quite vocal about accepting the status of civil union. As for those who want to continue to corrupt the union between a man and a woman, I don’t care what they think. They simply have to be defeated at the polls, and by our combined action. They don’t have to accept our rules, but we don’t have to accept them if they refuse to be decent about it.

        1. My dear you can disagree all you like but I live in the heart of homosexuality known as the Gay Area…YA KNOW WHERE IT ALL BEGAN!!! I know exactly what they say day in and out. I live it up close and personal.

          There is no fact or stat that will back your assertion. Go to any gay activist website.

          1. A) The use of “My dear” is condescending.
            B) Elton John himself has said he thought gay “marriage” was not preferable to civil union. Many conservative gays have said the same thing. You need to do more research before making assertions that no facts or stats exist.

            But all of that TOTALLY misses the point: I don’t care what the folks who would never agree to a civil union think. They are to be defeated, not appeased.

            1. The my dear was not meant to be condescending but the reality is you think it is because I dared to disagree with you. I don’t give a fig what Elton John thinks…he isn’t even an American. What is hilarious though is you missed the news report that GB is legalizing gay marriage. So apparently they and the rest of the gay community also disagree with you and Elton.

              Conservative gays are a minority within a minority. They are outnumbered and shunted aside. I am talking and referring to the majority of gays within that minority of the population. They want marriage so they can label themselves as ‘normal’ as in just like you and me. They seek to rebuild society in a different image. They want sexes and people interchangeable. That is also why you see the push among parents to not let their kids behave and act gender specific.

              I need more research? No it is you that needs more research because every single thing you have posted is anecdotal. Perhaps you should visit a few gay websites. Join some marches as well. Read something. The sheer fact that civil unions were voted for NOT ONCE BUT TWICE AND GAY MARRIAGE VOTED DOWN NOT ONCE BUT TWICE IN CALIFORNIA makes your assertions unfounded and incorrect.

              1. I never said the majority of gays don’t want “gay marriage,” yet here you are, pretending that somehow that’s what I intended by my assertion. You then blur that into, “no facts to support your statement.” Which is simply a lie. Calling it anecdotal is a grasping attempt to hold onto that lie. The fact is, prominent gays, including many who are conservative have said they would be happy with civil unions. This is what we call a fact, and you don’t have to like it.

                Here’s another fact, once again, which you seem hell-bent on ignoring: those who want to debase marriage are those who are to be defeated.

                If you don’t understand that, or or want to continue pushing back against it, then I place you among those who must be defeated as well, and don’t really give a rat’s a$$ you agree with me or not.

                1. HAHAHAHAHAHA! It never ceases to amaze me how nasty people can get when confronted with facts. Please re-read your posts. That is not what you said or implied despite your heavy editing. Yeah there are many that want civil unions but they are not by any stretch a majority which goes right back to my original point. Now go ahead and raise the roof off of the place, call me every name in the book, blah blah, blah. The other problem I see in the conservative camp is their inability to grasp that they often act like liberals.

                  And as you complain about being inferred upon realize I never said not one word that they weren’t to be defeated. You are right on that score at least. They are to be defeated. i didn’t acknowledge that comment because I agreed with it.

                2. Yes, you sure got nasty when confronted with a fact.
                  Now you’re simply being immature about it.

                  Look, you started in with this bizarre antagonism and have carried far beyond any utility. I suggest you knock it off, because we don’t do that here.

                  Argue honestly, or not at all. Your choice.

                3. No you got nasty because I dared to disagree with you. And don’t tell me what we do or don’t do here. I have been blogging here and all over the web for quite a good many years. I did argue honestly and laid out the facts THAT WERE NOT ANECDOTAL, which btw isn’t really fact. Anecdotal can often count but is easily trumped as well. Depends on the context. I also pointed out that despite your examples, GB is legalizing gay marriage. Now if you can’t handle someone disagreeing with you…TOUGH.

                  And as to antagonistic…that is what you have been throughout this entire thread with those that disagree with you. You have been quite nice to me on other threads when I do agree with you…but BAM! Disagree however slightly and let fur fly.

                  And prove I haven’t argued honestly. What a stupid statement. And quite frankly I don’t need you to give me choices either. How arrogant.

                4. My God, it’s like you think we can’t all just read upthread, where you started in on this crap by writing:

                  “There is no fact or stat that will back your assertion.”

                  This isn’t about “disagreement,” because it doesn’t appear we disagree over much here. This is about you making a factually wrong statement in the process of making a big, pointless deal about a minor aspect of my comment. When I called you on it with an actual fact, WITHOUT ANTAGONISM, you doubled down and reasserted I had no facts, and doubled down on the antagonism. What are we here, too stupid to read what you wrote?

                  That proves you aren’t arguing honestly, and your continuance here is now nothing more than rancor. Frankly I have no idea why you decided to make such a huge deal about this. It’s simple logic: my statement was that there are gays, some who are prominent, and some who are conservative, who endorse civil unions over marriage.

                  You challenged this, but the fact stands on its own. I’m not responsible for your feelings about it. I suggest you drop it, because it’s degenerated to senseless flaming about “daring to disagree”; conservatives acting like liberals; and “heavy editing” (again, the entire thread is visible to all, so that’s just odd); and people being “nasty” and all other sorts of flame-food. You brought it, not me.

                  Drop it already.

                5. I didn’t make the huge deal you did!!!

                  Yeah everyone can read what I wrote but not everyone is going to have your own special little interpretation. You made an assertion about gays that was backed up with anecdotal evidence at best.

                  I argued honestly. You accusing me otherwise proves you cannot refute me. I didn’t post any feelings. What I posted was pointing to the facts about gay marriage by showing results. And I just showed only a small handful of results. I could put up a whole lot more.

                  And No I won’t drop it. Who are you to order me around? Yeah the thread is totally readable from the jump including that huge edited diatribe you wrote. It shows you edited it. You even admitted it. So who is not reading what here????

                  You got nasty and arrogant the second I disagreed with you and yep people can indeed read it. Telling me how to post, telling me to ‘drop it’, what to do or don’t do, etc.

                  YOU ARE A POSEUR.

                  “I’m not responsible for your feelings about it. I suggest you drop it, because it’s degenerated to senseless flaming about “daring to disagree”; conservatives acting like liberals”.

                  Learn the difference between ‘feelings’ and ‘observation’. I posted an opinion based upon an observation. I never not once said how that observation makes me ‘feel’.

                  And if you want something dropped then you drop it. Take your own advice since you seem to freely give it.

                6. Please delineate exactly what policy I have broken?

                  I got called a whole lot of very personal insults on the Crowder thread by someone posting called ‘landscaper’ and not a thing was done about that.

                7. You are engaging in flaming here. Specifically by ratcheting up the rancor. I’ve suggested you drop it, now we’re beyond that.

                  I’ll look into the other thread.

                8. I just looked at that thread, and then at the full set of comments, and I don’t see any interaction between you and landscaper involving namecalling in the last few months. Could that have been at another site? By the way, if you flag a comment, we can find it faster.

                  As to namecalling, when it’s between regulars, and it doesn’t escalate, we tend to leave it alone. If someone starts laying in to folks, we have several options before banning them.

                9. I did flag him several times actually. It wasn’t at another site. I only know of ‘landscaper’ here. And this was beyond anything that happens with regulars. I see that a lot. Heck I have been involved in that. ‘Landscaper’ called me quite a few filthy names and personal insults. As a matter of fact he is the only person I have ever flagged. It was that bad. I don’t mind debate, (as you can obviously tell), you can even call me a moron, stupid, or whatever. I let stuff like that in the context that it is in speak for itself and roll off of me. What he was calling me went way beyond that. I wasn’t even really debating him actually. He just jumped in and called me a whole lot of things and told me to mind my own business in regards to people smoking pot. I can’t repeat what he said because it was deeply personal and quite ugly.

                  Now that right there seems like flaming to me and yet I saw ‘landscaper’ post just last night.

                  It was the Crowder thread with the video about drug legalization.

                10. Ah, I was looking in the more recent Crowder thread.

                  Yeah, that’s way beyond name calling. I’ve deleted those, and I’ll watch for any further like that.

                  (Deletions are the usual first course of action for spurious over-the-top stuff.)

      2. Well said, Laurel.
        One of the factors that gets left out by Christians is that marriage is a symbol of the union between Christ and His Church.
        So, when marriage gets re-defined to say homosexuals should also be able to participate’ Jesus is being maligned in a very significant manner.
        The Word says that not even the effeminate will make it to heaven, even that is an abomination in the site of a Holy and Just God.
        We are walking on dangerous ground and too many refuse to understand.

    2. Homosexuals already have the ability to have a religious marraige ceremony. I’ve been to a gay marriage, It was cute , It was in the 80’s.
      Since we all have the same religious freedoms, their religious ceremonhy was no different than yours or anyones because your religous ceremony did not legally marry you either
      . It was the legal document that you signed that made it a legal marriage. However this was not you gaining legal rights from the certificate
      Legal marriage is about one thing, insuring the State, society and the mother have the force of law behind them when requiring a father live up to his responsiblities. You can consider it the Demand the Deadbeat Dad Pay Up cerficate.
      A legal marriage is not about sanctity, its about welfare of children
      Homosexuals are never in situation where a legal marriage certificate proves the parenthood of the other spouse. Its quite impossible for two people of the same sex to create a biological child together The court could not deem the other man the father of the same child as his spouse. Again , the biological right of the child is not answered by a homosexual marriage certicate. In the case of lesbians and donated sperm, the non mother does not become the biological father in court just because of the marriage certificate, therefore the rights of the child is not addressed and can not be determined by the courts. In this situation, the lesbians willfully hide the idenity of the biological father
      The child is still left in the same position as any child of unmarried parents because in a court case , the one lesbian can not be held legally repsonsible for the child of the other lesbian…she is not the parent. Legally speaking, she was always the step parent , and just like a step parent would not be legally responsible for child support.
      There is no need for a “special accomdation” for homosexuals because there is no tax benefit from being married and there hasnt been one since the late 60’s. Our tax laws have long been altered to support single parenthood in the name of helping single mothers in particular. Its been a deficit to get married, and still is especially in regard to welfare benefits and foodstamps
      A couple that is unmarried will have their benefit determined individually according to their income, making them more likely to qualify for benefits because that State does not combine their incomes
      The same couple married could fail to qualify because the State combines their income thus elevating out of qualifying.

        1. Truth makes you sick? This is why the right is on the ropes. Not because we don’t have truth on our side, but because people like you won’t allow the right to exist and forever water down the very things that will create a healthy society and bring back the moral principles that were once the foundation of this nation.
          You must be thrilled that our taxes will soon be going up and the deficit will never shrink. You support the very lifestyles that create the entitlement programs that have sunk this great nation. pffffttt…

            1. After reading your posts I’m convinced you are a liberal. I’m sick because I agree with the truth…yep, that’s liberal speak.

          1. Honest question. I am so used to responding to most regular Scoopers, that I just automatically click, “like,” before responding. I have to get used to all the Trolls coming here on a regular basis. Thanks for pointing that out.

      1. That was an unconnected ramble, so I have no idea what your point is.

        Besides, I’m completely uninterested in how it all “works” today. Why? Because it doesn’t work at all.

      2. ssenecal5000, I owe you an apology. While we may be polar opposites and I don’t agree with much you say, you nonetheless have the right to say it, without me, or anyone else, for that matter, calling you names or speaking to you with derision.

        I decided for myself, that if I want to continue as a member of The Right Scoop, and enjoy the privileges of that membership, I must learn to be more tolerant of those I disagree with. The Scoop family is important to me, and you are part of that family.

        My problem, is that I stay angry almost all of the time, regarding Liberals, and Liberal thought. Sometimes, I transfer that anger to Conservatives or Independents, who don’t believe exactly as I do. I don’t have the right to do that.

        Please accept my most humble and sincere apologies, for any pain my comments may have caused you. It won’t happen again

        1. I’m heading for a soft pillow, K-Bob. I think you know enough about me by now, to know I don’t like these conversations. I should probably just stay away from them. I believe that is what I will do, in the future. Your guidance and wisdom, have been the best I have found on this site. God Bless You, and God Bless TRS.

    3. “++In fact, special accommodation can be made for same-sex unions, provided it isn’t called the same thing, and they don’t call themselves husband, wife, mom, or dad. No child should be forced to deal with confusion over what the term “Dad” means. I’m all for letting our homosexual friends and family “be together” without having to hide or be bullied for it. But they should recognize they are in a relationship that has nothing to do with marriage, or as I would call it, a sanctified union of a man and woman. We can give them status as a civil union, and treat them with dignity. But we don’t have to corrupt the vitally necessary (for society’s sake) union of a man and woman. in order to do so.”

      That is not the way society works. There is absolutely no way you can stop anyone from calling themselves “Mom”, “Dad”, “Husband”, or “Wife”. Are you going to get the word police after them? How would you stop them from teaching children not to label that in their own homes? You have the mantra of “we have to take back parental rights” but then you are going to let some outside enforcement body tell someone what their child or spouse can called in their own home?!

      That paragraph raises more questions than answers.

      And the court has repeatedly since the inception of this country defined what constitutes ‘religion’.

      Your new world order is arrogant and chaotic but what is more it is not realistic. If you’re angry that marriage comes with economic benefits and burdens, you don’t have much of an idea about the history of the institution. Its economic elements, as well as the societal recognition of a unified couple- outside of the religious community- are part of what made marriage an institution. State-recognition has had less to do with the degradation of marriage than the culture has. Start the long haul taking back the culture and marriage will right itself. It’s a symptom, not the disease.

      1. You assume much that is not contained in what I wrote.

        Words take hold for reasons. One of which is the law. One is the definitions made by “experts” (whomever they might be). You obviously don’t change this overnight, you simply establish a standard and then live by it, publish it heavily, and make sure you are consistent with your use of the terminology. This is nothing new, and there is no arrogance involved: it’s just how things work.

            1. I responded directly and only to what you wrote. No assumptions made but in the world of academia some assumptions are allowed. Such as I didn’t use the term ‘government’ in regards to your post. I used the term ‘outside body’ but it would be assumed that ‘outside body’ would be from the government.

              I can’t tell if you didn’t communicate your thoughts well, if you have some Orwellian ideas, or if you are assuming that I know what you are referring to when you say ‘assumptions’.

              I gleaned a little more from this response:

              “Words take hold for reasons. One of which is the law. One is the definitions made by “experts” (whomever they might
              be). You obviously don’t change this overnight, you simply establish a standard and then live by it, publish it heavily, and make sure you are consistent with your use of the terminology. This is nothing new, and there is no arrogance involved: it’s just how things work.”

              I don’t think it is practical though. That is an opinion based upon what you wrote. No flaming or feelings involved. Just an observation.

              And another question..

              When you wrote this did you mean it?

              “Thanks! I hope alla you’se folks help hammer that idea into shape. Or all the way out. Whichever way it goes!”

              1. N Orwell, just good, clean rebooting of the concept to get the state out of it.

                As to the last bit, yes, absolutely. Too many people become wedded to a concept and take it personally when others criticize that concept. Much pain ensues.

                I believe ideas should be released and have to survive on their own. The really good ones fight back all by themselves. So have at it.

                1. I did. I was told I was ‘flaming’. So I guess I won’t.

                  I am going to leave you with this since I read your large thread posting three times.

                  Much has been written, periodicals, articles, studies, and books that the downfall of marriage actually came with ‘no fault’ divorce.

                  I think there is something to what you say about marriage but your post is based on a false historical accounting of what marriage has always been. Economics have always been a major component of it. That predates Christianity btw. and Christianity also incorporates the economics of it as well. That is why ‘the two shall become one’. That isn’t just for the husband and wife but for the children that must be reared and cared for. That falls under the heading of ‘economics’.

                  Now I am going to make an assumption and you can correct me if I make this in error. I think what you are referring to in your post about it is the government manipulating marriage via household incomes that in the end also affects child rearing through economics aka taxation.

                  I don’t think it is possible to get the state out of marriage because those that are not religious need the state to marry them. Once upon a time they had to go to a church regardless of lack of religion but SCOTUS ruled that unconstitutional and violation of first amendment. However they also ruled that atheism is indeed a religion!

                  Have a nice evening.

                2. I am not basing it on a false accounting, I am dismissing the accounting altogether. We need to clear out the debris and start over.

                  I didn’t want to go into the economics aspect in that comment, because it was long enough already. But yes, that’s why the state’s interest.

                  I’ve met many folks who are non-religious, but got married in a church, or by a cleric of some sort. So I don’t see that as a major problem at this stage of trying to get a reboot. Maybe later, once the church informs the state of it’s options.

                  You have a nice evening, too. I’m gonna go eat something large, and bad for me.

                3. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

                  It appears Atheists objected to church weddings but what I find hilarious is any ceremony associated with marriage is rooted in religion. Other wise not just sign a piece of paper and be done with it?

                  Have a good one!

  17. Even the Palin’s are suffering like other parents. It’s a shame to see these two young people split. Society does seem to have more influence than parents sometimes. Yes, liberals always on the look out for someone to degrade to their level will be on this.

  18. First of all it is nobody’s business whether they are divorcing. Secondly, I am not going to believe this until it comes from someone other than the Enquirer. Lastly, IMHO it is sick people who rejoice at another’s problem and if the libs are then my previous opinion of them is correct; a bunch of ………………………..!

  19. Why do liberals believe they have the right to pass judgement on the length of anyone’s marriage? It is in their belief system that the traditional marriage of a man and a woman is not good. They’ve also worked for generations to try and destroy the traditional family and make it easier for people to get a divorce by systematically removing the stigma of divorce from society.
    In other news, Sarah Palin is still married to her high school sweetheart.

    1. The reason libs pass judgment is because so many conservatives pass judgment on people who choose not to get married and have a passel of kids even when they are in a committed, monogamous relationship.

        1. I don’t know why:

          Studies indicate that the average male h o m o s e x u a l has hundreds of s e x partners in his lifetime. The median number of partners for h o m o s e x u a l s is four times higher than for heterosexuals. A study on the s e x u a l profiles of 2,583 older h o m o s e x u a l s, published in the Journal of S e x Research, found that only 2.7 percent claimed to have had s e x with one partner only. Research has also found that few h o m o s e x u a l relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners.”

          The following. for example, was published in Lambda:

          24 percent of g a y men had more than 100 partners.
          43 percent of g a y men had more than 500 partners.
          28 percent of g a y men had more than 1,000 partners.

          According to an Australian study, the largest of its kind to date, 33% of the respondents reported having been in an a b u s i v e relationship with a same-s e x partner. This included verbal or physical a b u s e. The a b u s i v e relationships were higher for women than for men, but was highest for t r a n s g e n d e r e d males.

          Maybe, just maybe there’s legitimacy to the “judgment”. I think it would do some Conservatives well to actually do their homework before they assume everyone else is simply being “judgmental”.

          1. How many people have you had sex with? I am not sure who they are sampling but I would say that those percentages are horribly inaccurate. I have a feeling you are just insecure in your own sexuality, thus the need to demean others. Sad really. Regardless, your post is WAY off topic and completely asinine.

            1. Well, that would have to be something you argue with the researchers, but these figures are consistent with research done both here in the States and elsewhere in Europe.

              A major study by Bell and Weinberg revealed that 78% of male homosexual “affairs” (relationships entered into with an intent of commitment) lasted less than three years. Only 12% lasted five years or longer. Study by Alan P. Bell and Martin S. Weinberg, “Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women”, (New York, Simon and Shuster, 1978) p.314

              David McWhirter and Andrew Mattison conducted a non-random study of 156 stable committed male homosexual couples. They found that none of the over 100 couple that had been together for more than 5 years had been sexually monogamous or exclusive. The authors, themselves a gay couple, argued that for male couples, sexual monogamy is a passing stage of homophobia and that many homosexuals separate emotional fidelity and sexual exclusivity. What matters for male couples is emotional not physical faithfulness.D McWhirter and A Mattison, “The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop”, (Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-Hall).

            2. You have a “feeling”, stage9 has actual statistics. I’ll tell you who is insecure. Go get that mirror and take a look.

              1. I began tracking the homosexual movement in the late 90’s when I came a cross an article detailing a consorted effort by homosexuals to force their agenda on the American public. The title of the book that has been credited with much of the success of the homosexual movement was called: “After the Ball – How America will conquer its fear and hatred of Gays in the 90s”

                It was written by two homosexual men, Marshall Kirk, a researcher in neuropsychiatry and Hunter Madsen “an expert on public persuasion tactics and social marketing.” Their goal was to use psychological manipulation — propaganda — to impose homosexuality on the public without the public even being aware of it. It was the classic “toad in the pot of slow boiling water” approach where they would use techniques aimed at causing the public to distance themselves from prejudices they normally viewed as stereotypically abhorrent. They called this technique “Jamming”.

                We see examples of this today. When liberals accuse Conservatives of being racist, nazis, intolerant, hateful, xenophobic, islamophobic, and homophobic, they are PURPOSEFULLY using these terms as a means to JAM the opponent. That is, imposing upon their opponent a negative sterotype that diminishes the opponent’s image of himself.

                No one wants to be labelled a racist (unless you are one). We would all like to believe that we are “good, moral people”. Homosexuals and liberal fanatics know this and that is the crux of their attack. When we’re called a homophobe, something we naturally and adamantly deny, it puts us on the DEFENSIVE where we are weak — having to defend our honor — rather than on the OFFENSIVE — making them defend theirs –where they are weak.

                Homosexuals know that if you can expose their behavior to to the Light of day, they will lose the battle.

                Homosexual activist Kevin Jennings admitted as much:

                “If the Radical Right can succeed in portraying us as preying on children, we will lose. Their language–‘promoting h o m o s e x u a l i t y’ is one example–is laced with subtle and notsosubtle innuendo that we are ‘after their kids.’ We must learn from the abortion struggle, where the clever claiming of the term ‘pro-life’ allowed those who opposed abortion on demand to frame the issue to their advantage, to make sure that we do not allow ourselves to be painted into a corner before the debate even begins.”

                The only way to defeat the homosexual agenda is to expose it. And so, for over 10 years I’ve been cataloging and studying their movement. Observing their tactics and watching the public buy into it, hook, line and sinker. It’s incredible just how successful it has really been.

                You can read more about how they did it here:
                The homosexual propaganda campaign in America’s media

                1. Thanks for the information and the link! Well written and very informative, stage9.
                  I’ll await the rebuttals from the leftists….but, won’t hold my breath.

            3. Actually Canada has very similar studies on homosexuality. There is a reason that the average lifespan of a homosexual man is 42. Very high suicide rate as well.

              Facts are facts and attacking him personally doesn’t refute those facts. If you want to do that feel free but anything less in unintelligent. And don’t go on later to say he called you name first. That seems to be a favorite tactic these days on the web and this site has more than it’s fair share of that nonsense.

      1. Only when we have to pay for it. When those people who “choose not to get married and have a passel of kids” wind up being wards of the taxpayer, it really doesn’t matter if they are in a “commited, monogamous relationship.”

        When you expect us to pay your bills, expect to be judged.

        1. Wow, so you think people who don’t get married and have kids are lazy and can’t take care of themselves? How ignorant.

          1. Single parent households make up the lion’s share of government benefits and welfare entitlement spending. Single parent children have an uphill climb to achieve the same success or opportunity that married parent children do. Single parent children also are more likely to get into drugs or alcohol, crime and other problems that sidetrack them from otherwise being successful.

            That’s not ignorant, that’s not ideology, that’s just the straight facts. Those are the demographics. Those are the numbers. Those are the realities.

            I did not say it applied to all single parents, but my statement was no more a blanket statement about single parents than your blanket statement about conservatives, you hypocrite.

                1. I read it wodiej, and I got it. This site is under attack from the Left. Don’t let them get under your skin. From this day forward, I will follow every single post you make.

                2. I’m not from the left. Exactly the opposite. I’m a fiscal and national security conservative and social issue libertarian (for the most part) that can’t stand PaulBots.

                  I’m still waiting to see the evidence from wodie that shows where conservatives pass judgement on people who aren’t married and/ or don’t have children on a regular basis. The evidence that makes it acceptable for the left to continue to attack Palin on these grounds.

                  If the intent of wodie’s post was directed at a very minute amount of bible thumpers who think they are the authority on morality, there’s a valid point. Is this the right place to make it ?

            1. I am NOT talking about straight people who have kids out of wedlock. I am talking about monogamous, committed people gay and straight who dont’ have a bunch of kids then expect everyone else to provide public education and all kinds of other freebies for them. Again, ignorance about what I am talking about.

              1. “The reason libs pass judgment is because so many conservatives pass judgment on people who choose not to get married and have a passel of kids even when they are in a committed, monogamous relationship. ”

                Show me where conservatives routinely bash people, who have no kids, for being in a relationship. Where ?

                There are a million things under the sun that taxdollars pay for that a million people would object to funding. Personally, I’d rather have to pay for our own children’s education. Then I wouldn’t have to send them to schools with idiots like you.

                The only reason I may be ignorant about what YOU are talking about, is because what you are talking about makes no sense.

                You called me ingorant for saying that “when we have to pay your bills, expect to be judged”. I simply responded to it.

                1. Facts and statistics are becoming less and less important to the left as more and more studies show how wrong they are and being wrong is a very difficult thing to admit to.

      2. That judgement is accurate. Marriage is about insuring children have a legally responsible father , the very man who creates them
        Every child born to the wife in a legal marriage is automatically the child of the husband. This insures that the father will by force of law ,not his mere whims, will be required to support his own children created from his sexual acts.
        When men go around planting their seed willy nilly, children end up not having the support they are morally and legally entitled too.
        THAT reason alone is why “conservatives” and the “religious” find object to unmarried baby creators.
        We all should object even atheists, because WE have to pay to support the children of dead beat dads.
        They don’t support themselves
        This is why divorce is not immoral. It’s actually from the Old Testement. Jews

  20. So tell us again Sarah about how gays being able to marry will somehow threaten the “sanctity of marriage” again???

    1. You should do a study in 10 yrs to see how many gays who were married stayed together. How does this have anything to do with gay marriage? Oh that’s right, because Palin does not herself believe that traditional marriage is a same sex marriage. She’s actually correct, it’s not. It’s also called her own personal belief and the last time I checked that’s her right to do so living in a free society. Gay marriage also threatens the sanctity of a society dunderhead.

      1. Thankfully, people that think like me outnumber you. Gays are Americans just like you and deserve the SAME civil rights that YOU enjoy. They are also human beings endowed by their creator with inalienable rights that are not “granted” by bigots like you. You are on the wrong side of history and it will become painfully clear to you in the years ahead…

        1. Oh really, you think gays and lesbians outnumber people and people like you outnumber people like me? Ok, check the stats on that honeybaby. Marriage is not a civil right. Gays and lesbians have all the rights they want in the country. Where in the Constitution does it say anything about gay people? Painfully clear to me??? no nothing will be painful to me. I’m a live and let live person. I don’t care where a man sticks his do dah or where a woman sticks her face, but when your beliefs get forced upon me where we have a problem. And that’s all you leftists know how to do, scream, spit, complain, claim that you’re oppressed calling everyone under the sun who doesn’t agree with you bigot homophobe etc etc. but yet you have no such proof that anyone who doesn’t agree with you is that, only because they disagree with you, you do so. On the wrong side of history I? We’ll let God be the judge of that.

          1. Bingo!
            I don’t care about ‘Gay’, I have ‘Gay’ friends, I have ‘Gay’ relatives. It’s not about ‘Gay’.
            It’s about those who are so insecure about their own sexuality, that they feel the need to wear it around like cheap (“I’m Queer and I’m here”) tee shirt and wave it in my face and then get offended and indignant when I have something to say about it.
            Homosexuals comprise 2 to 4% of the American population and the ones who aren’t satisfied unless everybody else knows it, comprise a very small segment of that.

            1. I dislike that as well, however, as a gay man, you’d be shocked at what we have to deal with on a daily basis. Being in your face so to speak, is the natural reaction by some people to feeling trampled on.

              1. I don’t doubt for a moment that there is, once ‘some’ find out that you are ‘Gay’. I for one, flat don’t care about your sexual preference. My Cousin and her girlfriend are good friends, in fact, I just got off facebook with the girlfriend. I sent out a Christmas card yesterday to a dear friend in Calif. He’s 84, he’s had the same partner for the 40 years that I’ve known him. He was the accountant for my (late) father’s Corp. and we worked together on a daily basis. Not once in all these years has he felt the need to tell me, “Do you know I’m Gay?” What he does with his home life has never been any of my business, nor has mine been his. He’s quite the character, he lives in the ‘high rent district’ of Palm Desert Calif. and drives a Rolls Royce. Eccentric, yes flamboyant, yes. He can afford to be but never once in a ‘Gay’ sort of way.

            2. I think everyone, gay and straight do not need to be wearing a sign and all is well. I don’t see too many straight people showing public affection or making a big deal of their sexuality. Don’t see why gay people should either. I think most don’t really care.

            3. Exactly. The whole country is falling apart over real issues but to them their only concern is gay this, gay that, gay gay gay gay gay. gay 24/7/365 they never close and never shut up. You can give them gay marriage federally nation wide one day and they’d still piss and moan about something. They see everything through the prism of being gay and frankly, your sexuality shouldn’t be what makes the person. but they make it seem that way.

          2. I love how the names just flow so easily, “bigot” “judgemental” “homophobe” etc. Yes, we are the intolerant ones.

        2. numbers do never designate thuth. 3+3 will always 6.

          I finaly read some real stupid opinion today, I agree, life’s never fair

        3. If you guys outnumber us then why do you have minority status and why has 31 states modified their constitutions?

          Can you stamp your foot any harder?

    2. It’s simple. God ordained marriage to be between a man and a woman. Even if they divorce, this fact is not lost; God does not retract his covenant simply because we ignore it.

      Sodomy is a perversion of God’s biological design. It is a sign of the lowest form of human debauchery and degradation.

      How’s that for an answer?

      1. Someday the world will need to truly embrace God’s words of loving one another. It didn’t say if you agree w how they live their lives.

        1. Love and immorality are contradictory, not friends.

          “Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” 1 John2:15

          Now there’s a scripture you’ll NEVER hear preached in the modern church. They avoid this one like the plague.

    3. how do gays marriage help the sanctity of marriage, you can’t even in a slight spark of decency can think of one. I’ll awaits your reply

    4. Actually guys, GB is even saying that LGBT people should not be prevented from marriage. I don’t want to step into a flame war, a religious debate, or a troll fest, BUT it is my belief that a big reason we as conservatives lose national campaigns is precisely the inability to look beyond the religious culture war. Let us marry, get the government out of marriage, and let people live their lives. If it doesn’t hurt you then it should not concern you. We have much bigger problems (fiscal) than LGBT equality issues. That is a losing battle…

      1. Keep dreaming
        It does hurt , it hurts children and everyones wallet.
        There is no such thing as a right of marriage for adults for anyone
        The only rights addressed in a marriage are the biological rights of children to know and be supported by the very people who create them…at the time of their birth, not later
        The greatest scourg of mankind from the beginning has not been war or disease, its been the fathlessness of children.
        Marriage both in the religous ceremony and the legal contract are ONLY about insuring that fathers are legally and morally responsible for their chidlren…..a product of their own actions
        When fathers do NOT feel obligated to provide for their chidlren, then we all have too with ever growing welfare programs> We ALL pay for that.
        You are losing the battle , gay marriage is against the constituion in 31 states. The Supreme court, just like the European High court of Human rights , is going to declare “homosexual marrige” NOT a civil or human right…..not because they are meeanies, but becasue its not a civil or human right for anyone.

        1. We can respectfully agree to disagree… I agree about fatherless children, but LGBT people being singled out as far as laws go is rather against the nature of this country. I happen to believe (as most trends show) that within a generation it will be legal across the US. Then we can all feel free to be miserable with the rest of ya 😉

          1. You got it all backward. Pay attention, There is NO right to marriage for anyone. That’s why there are other restrictions, all of which are based on protecting children…..age restrictions, close relations, polygamy.
            Gays are not trying to again equality, they are attempting to create new rights that no one has.
            Marriage has ZERO to do with the rights of the married.
            Anything you can do as marriage , you can do as single, including file jointly, deduct dependents. buy anything together including property.
            The notion of rights garnered FROM your sexual desires is new and idiotic. And it’s a threat to all our Constitutional rights. whether you are gay or straight. If sexual desires emit rights then all desires do. When we accept that non-sense then all our actual rights are limited or destroyed.
            It has already started to happen. Liberal mayors and Govs dismissed the freedom of religion, freedom speech and free association when they attacked ChickFila for the CEO’s stance on marriage.
            To them the new gay “rights” cancelled out actual rights.
            This is a threat to everyone’s liberty and freedoms.

            1. I don’t agree, and there is nothing you can say by condescendingly telling me to “pay attention” that will change that. When liberals start passing laws that say a man and a woman can not get married then we will talk. Have a blessed day

              1. I figured as much, nothing will effect you limited view

                Unlike what you claim, you already have the same rights as everyone else concerning marrriage because YOU were a child once and had the very same biological rights as all of us. If your fahter did not or could not live up to his responsibility, then you did without and suffered,or we all payed to support you.
                You already had the “rights” you are campaigning to get.

              2. I’m sure that will be the next thing on the LGBT agenda list. The man made a valid point and you diverted attention away with your lame comment on him telling you to pay attention. He’s right about Chick Fila. The gay left has been rather knee jerk in such cases and it usually keeps back firing on them. And please know that every time a Chick Fila incident happens, it hurts your movement. Because all the CEO said was he didn’t believe in same sex marriage. Not what the gay mafia hordes, in their sing song unison, claiming that he was saying LGBTs couldnt eat in his restaurant.

              3. You’re wrong because you believe the “right to marry” comes from the state. This is a LIBERAL construct that has no basis in reality. It’s is pure fiction. Marriage was established by God Himself. There was marriage long before there was a “State”.

                The only responsibility government has as far as marriage and family is concerned is for the preservation of posterity — creating an environment where healthy families are able to propagate future generations. And that is why tax laws and marriage laws exist!

                We do not exist in this society to do what we please when we please. That is NOT the Founders’ vision of liberty. That is called moral anarchy and is destructive to a healthy society.

                Counterfeit marriage neither contributes to the health of society nor to posterity. In fact, clear evidence shows QUITE THE OPPOSITE!

                What Same Sex Marriage Has Done to Massachusetts

                You can argue from ignorance if you like. You can adopt the liberal view of “gays who love each other should be allowed to marry”, which is a totally BOGUS assertion, or you can observe what’s actually happening in states like MA and bring yourself up to speed on reality.

                1. Reality is in this country if it is a right it DOESN’T come from government…it comes from God. We know what God says in regard to homosexuality.

                  If marriage were a right it wouldn’t require a license.

              4. You can agree or not but you sound silly. Foot stamping isn’t going to cut it. Feeling isn’t thinking either.

                Please show me where any right laid out in Constitution or Bill of Rights requires a license or consent of government to exercise that right. I don’t recall needing a license to exercise my right for say..oh…the First Amendment. Pick one.

          2. Um, no it’s not! Immorality goes against the nature of this country.

            “[W]e have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. . . . Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” – John Adams (Source: John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Second President of the United States, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Little, Brown, and Co. 1854), Vol. IX, p. 229, October 11, 1798.)

            “In the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior. The Declaration of Independence laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity.” — John Quincy Adams (Sixth President of the United States; Diplomat; Secretary of State; U.S. Senator; US Representative)

            “Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise. In this sense and to this extent, our civilizations and our institutions are emphatically Christian.” — 1883 Illinois Supreme Court ruling in Richmond v. Moore (Richmond v. Moore, 107 Ill. 429, 1883 WL 10319 (Ill.), 47 Am.Rep. 445 (Ill. 1883).

            “Had the people, during the Revolution, had a suspicion of any attempt to war against Christianity, that Revolution would have been strangled in its cradle… In this age, there can be no substitute for Christianity… That was the religion of the founders of the republic and they expected it to remain the religion of their descendants.”9. — Congress, U. S. House Judiciary Committee, 1854

            “The great, vital, and conservative element in our system is the belief of our people in the pure doctrines and the divine truths of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.”8 — Congress 1854

            “The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” 1. — John Adams (Signer of the Declaration; Judge; Diplomat; One of the Two Signers of the Bill of Rights, Second President of the United States)

            “There must be religion. When that ligament is torn, society is disjointed and its members perish… [T]he most important of all lessons is the denunciation of ruin to every state that rejects the precepts of religion.”29 — Gouverneur Morris (Revolutionary Officer; Member of the Continental Congress; signer of the Constitution; Penman of the Constitution; Diplomat; US Senator)

            “[Governments] could not give the rights essential to happiness… We claim them from a higher source: from the King of kings, and Lord of all the earth.10. — John Dickenson (Signer of the Constitution; Governor of Pennsylvania; Governor of Deleware; General in the American Revolution)

          3. LBGT, you realize the B is for Bi-sexual, correct?
            Do you draw any kind of line? Because when the bi-sexual starts saying, “I love a man and a woman and want to marry them both”, what will you say?

          4. They aren’t being singled out. There is no right to marry and as far as that goes they have the same privilege to marry someone of the opposite sex as I do.

            As for marrying for love…show me in the law anywhere where one has to marry for love. Where is that covered? Marrying for love is a modern day invention. It rarely happened prior to the 20th century. Some marriages were for love but most were arranged and even that was due quite often to finance. Hence the reason the ME is so inbred. They continually inter-married within their family to keep the wealth within the family.

      2. Couldn’t agree more. Conservatives lose because they exhibit judgmental, self righteous attitudes towards ohers.

        1. Most of the religious people I know are loving and kind. Talk about stereotyping and “judging” yourself. LOL. They follow God’s law and that’s why people like you deem them “judgmental.”

          1. God’s words do not condone judging others. As for following God’s laws, again self righteous attitudes. No human on this earth is capable of being without sin.

                1. Being FOR traditional marriage is not judgemental! Nice strawman there. How twisted .. you have accepted the Leftist definition of what is “judgemental” and/or tolerant.


                2. We are not to judge who is going to heaven or who is going to hell, that is reserved for God. But we make judgements everyday as to what type of behavior we want to portray, what morals we believe in, what kind of virtues we want instilled in our own lives. We make those decisions based on…… judgements!

                3. “God did not give anyone the right to judge others”.
                  Yes He did. And if you think you’re going thru life without judging others, you’re kidding only yourself.
                  Ever judge someone else’s driving skills?
                  In Matthew 7:1-5 Jesus isn’t saying not to judge. He is directing others to be careful how they judge. Jesus is saying not to judge someone else who isn’t paying their taxes (for instance) when you’re not paying them either! Get the speck out of yours first.
                  God thru Paul said: “Judge not according to sight, but judge righteous judgment.” (John 7:24).
                  John 12:48 says the Word of God will judge us all. Therefore, when God said homosexuality was an abomination to Him, we will be judge according to how we line up with what HE says.
                  There is so much in studying out judgment according to God’s Word, but suffice it to say that Christians and non Christians alike do not understand the meaning of judging.

                4. I don’t even think some even “get” the hypocrisy part. They are too busy moralizing to the rest of us “judgmental” conservatives. If it wasn’t so sad and pathetic, it would be funny.

            1. WRONG!

              The Bible says that we are to judge with RIGHT judgment. What is “right” judgment? Right judgment is RIGHTEOUS JUDGMENT. It’s God’s judgment. What God deems morally right or morally wrong according to His Word.

              Wrong judgment is using immoral or worldly or ungodly judgment to draw moral conclusions.

              When someone uses worldly wisdom to condone or engage in behavior God calls sin, they are using ungodly judgment and they will be judged by God accordingly.

              Everyone has a moral responsibility to make moral judgments as to what is right and what is wrong. Only God has the moral authority however to sentence someone for their sin.

        2. that’s good. you can go down that slippery slope and the next thing you know, we’ll be arguing rights for a person to marry more than one person, or a child, or an animal. yes please, just throw your principles out the window republicans and conservatives. become liberals and democrats. for the only real way we all live in harmony in this country is for republicans and conservatives to forget who they are and what they stand for. what a load of garbage.

        3. Damn straight. Not a single person on planet earth doesn’t judge others. Hence the reason we have people who call themselves ‘judges’ and we have bodies of politic known as ‘juries’.

          Conservatives suck at messaging. They are way behind in the culture wars. They ignored communism in the school system at every level for far too long. They compromised and played footsie with the immoral left and not for righteous reasons…most often it was simply over money. Conservatives may never catch up and may never win another election. SO WHAT?! If America falls then so be it. I am ready for God but are you with that moral relativism and judgement you just passed by trying to say you are non judgmental. Yes, your conservative proclamation was a personal opinion made based in and upon judgment.

          You sound silly.

      3. How about you stop telling people they can’t have their faith. Glenn Beck can go to hell. The man is a corporate whore and a shill. I could care less. It really isn’t about marriage. Its about LGBTs thumbing the noses at traditional marriage by getting the country to identify LGBT unions as traditional marriage. and it’s not. perhaps if the LGBT community accept that and stop trying to jam their agenda down everyone’s throat in this country, it would be a better place.

      4. So?

        Just becaue GB says it we should just fall in line and make it so?

        GOD SAYS NO! And I am much more concerned with his judgment and word than GB! Furthermore I am not going to compromise my morals and principles to win an election.

      5. That’s what civil unions are for. Churches and people who are Christian business owners have a right of religious expression under the Constitution. No where does it give people the right to sue these Christians for not recognizing or providing services to homosexual marriage, which is what happens when people decide what constitutes a civil right based purely on emotion instead of what the definition has been for over 3 thousand years.

  21. This is the new liberalized American culture — a result of their push for a sexual revolution (revulsion). Entire generations of young people are growing up believing that marriage is temporary.

    All of the glow of the hollywood fairy tale fades when the demands of “commitment” come calling. When they find out that their relationship requires work, they abandon them.

    1. You’re going to try to blame the “liberal media” for this?? Isn’t he the son of your biggest tea party darling? Isn’t her influence strong enough to overcome the evils of “liberalism”?

      Or maybe she was too busy jetting all over the country trying to make money conning people to worry about providing guidance to her son & daughter-in-law.

      1. Just like liberals to believe that someone can have control over another. The story comes from the NAT EQ by the way, perhaps its not true.

          1. Well sad to see that yet another marriage has gone under in this country. Sadly, Track is not the only one in this country going through a divorce. It seems everyone I spoke to in recent days has marriage problems and either is looking to or in the process of getting a divorce. And it’s liberalism over a period of time in society that has made it more easy to get a divorce and progs/libs have dumbed down the sanctity of marriage.

      2. I don’t recall using the word “liberal media” anywhere in my post. Is your illiteracy just a sign of your pathology or your liberalism?

  22. The woman could discover the cure for Cancer and she would vilified for it. Not because she is a Republican. But, because she must have ‘stolen’ it from Obama as a way to keep herself on the political stage.

    That’s how unhinged these rat freaks are!

    I don’t care how or why her son and his wife are having family issues. It’s none of my business. But for these couch turds on the left, with their friggin loser lives, they are just consumed with hatred towards this woman. How depressing their lives must really be to ignore everything else around them to keep a laser like focus on a woman who is now a private citizen.

    (***okay, yeah I do like how she lives rent free in their sick twisted little minds***) And I’m pretty sure her family has built up an ‘armored system’ to fight against this continuous onslaught. But at the same time, it must get pretty tiresome, too.

  23. Since libs usually just shack up, you don’t see much about divorces in the scandal rags. Kim Kardashian was married for what, 2 weeks?

    1. When a liberal finds out that relationships are usually supposed to last longer than last call they’re not sure how to handle that.

      1. You might want to rephrase that since Bristol confessed to getting pregnant in a tent because she was “drunk on wine coolers”…

        1. Saul Alinsky Rule 4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules. (This is a serious rule. The besieged entity’s very credibility and reputation is at stake, because if activists catch it lying or not living up to its commitments, they can continue to chip away at the damage.)

        2. I’ll rephrase that: The anti-god, anti-American, anti-intellectual liberal worldview is DIRECTLY responsible for teaching an entire generation of young people that promiscuity is good and monogamy is too inhibiting. As a result, our children grow up with a fairy tale notion of marriage and love and fail to understand that the glue that holds marriage together is commitment, not sex or puppy love.

          1. You think this liberal has ANY clue what you are talking about? You might as well be speaking Chinese or Charlie Brown’s teacher “wah, wah, wah.”

          2. In my view it goes deeper than that. Notice with monogamy and marriage, as well as other issues, there is a distinct lack of self control being taught?

            Why is that?

            So they can have more government to remake civilization into the false promise of Utopia. The more bad behavior, the more government is called for. It is a power trip that rivals Satan himself.

            People wonder why teen pregnancy as well as childhood obesity, drug abuse, heinous crime keeps getting higher and higher. Whether by design (which may give liberals too much credit) or default the end result is the same.

      1. Kardashian’s marriage was just an ‘oh well’ in the scandal rags. Anything about the Palin’s is front page. It’s called ‘Situational Hypocrisy’.

  24. I wish they would stick it out longer than a year. Unless there is some very bad stuff going on its hard to really know each other after just “being together”12 or 15 months. Esp with Track being away.

    They need more time- to laugh, fight and just hang out.

  25. There is something wrong with people who take pleasure in other people’s misfortunes or failures. I’m sorry their marriage didn’t work but they’re certainly not unique…at least they tried.

  26. Why can’t we showcase the divorce of homosexuals and make them the laughing stock of the world the way the left is fixated on any failings of a Palin?
    Of course, the right still has a conscience, guess that does get in the way.

      1. That’s BULL! All men and women are permitted to marry. And can you people stop making up these idiotic terms that carry no meaning other then a way to brainwash…

  27. Sorry to hear they are divorcing.
    That libs would celebrate another marriage breakup is no surprise. That Moron’s son was convicted of being a weasel tough guy who had to beat up a woman to show he’s a man is no surprise either. I wonder what his sentence will be. I’m betting he’ll get off with a slap on the wrist thanks to his corrupt scumbag father.

  28. “In other news, Democrat Congressman Jim Moran’s son found guilty of beating up his girlfriend. ” And the liberal gets probation for domestic abuse. Yup, Democrat #WarOnWomen the sequel.

  29. Will Bill Maher come to visit Palins?
    “Flying in Alaska” will have a different meaning and a long duration…
    …there may not be enough bone surgeons to put him together after that…

  30. According to the media isn’t Sarah the mother of all the babies, including Bristol’s? Why can’t Sarah also be the mother of Britta? Next thing you know the media will have Track and Bristol partnering up, Todd and one or more of his snow machines hooked up, Willow will be exposed as a space alien, Piper will become a robot with a rare software disorder, and Sarah will still be Moriarty to the left’s Sherlock Homeboy and kryptonite to their stuperman.

    I know, it’s not nearly tawdry or far-fetched enough.

  31. Ok, let’s see now. If a Conservative gets a divorce, there has to be a national holiday with three days of revelry and loud partying.

    And if a Liberal 1) beats up their spouse, 2) has multiple affairs while staying married, 3) has sex in the Oval Office with someone other than your wife, 4) drives off a bridge, killing your non-spousal, female companion — then the media does…..uhh, nothing.

    Heck, they’d be surprised if a liberal even got married, let alone divorced.

      1. Not in the same way the media covers the Palin family, even you can’t possibly be that brain dead…wait, you’re a liberal lunatic….never mind.

    1. Only sodomites want to marry (but only so they can redefine it and play “house”). Liberals run from it like an antelope fleeing a pride!

  32. the congressman said. “They look forward to putting this embarrassing situation behind them.”

    I just bet they do there congressman… I just bet.

    It’s more like YOU want to put this embarrassing situation behind YOU. Maybe you congressman should take a leave of absence from your “congressman” job and attend to your parenting skills for your twenty-something son going on thirteen.

  33. Liberals are such hypocritical bigots. Homosexuality is OK, drug use is OK, stealing elections is OK, having sex in the oval office with interns is OK, making idiotic and insane comments is OK! What about Joe Biden daughter being caught on camera using cocaine? But, that’s OK, I guess! Moreover, hardly anyone in Hollywood is ever married longer than a few years or months. Now we are to care what these irate, illiterate, abhorrent, and repugnant liberals think about Sarah Palin’s son getting a divorce! I don’t really care because I know that these people are mentally disturbed on so many levels. They have no values, none, and will use anything to ridicule and mock republicans.

    1. I saw a great bumper sticker:


  34. Last I checked Sarah’s happily married to her high school sweetheart. They have nothing on her! The last thing Libs want to do is start a media war on whose siblings are worse!

    1. You are right, however, with the MSM in liberal-worship mode, everything is on the table.

      Remember, hypocrisy is their main trait.

      1. I quess they utilize their God given choice as Free Moral Agent. Both of my two daughters got devorced once, one remarried, one decide to remain single. Both were raised in Christian values. All I can say today to all kids, Someone will never leave,if all fail. Theres’ a Special “Someone” find that one !

  35. Ok, folks. I’m outa here for today. Will reply to all tomorrow.

    Peace to each of you. and Goodnight as I’m wiped out.

      1. The boy has stated he dates several ladies. That would make any red-blooded American male lose track of time and daylight. He needs his rest, I’m sure. You go, Mike.

        1. Us too. We’ve been turning out the lights at 4 or 5 lately. I wish I could say we’ve been partying- but sadly, we havent been.

          I. MUST. DO. SOME. THING. FUN. SOON.

            1. Dont explode. 🙁 I dont want to have to come there to clean up after you. Hey- we’re making “sub” sandwichs on friday. I think. Veggie for me, and chicken for hubby. Woo hoo. Gosh we are cheap dates. Last night I said, funny I “thought” we would still be celebrating, our win of the election. My husband just glared at me.

              It’s crazy. I used to be motivated to travel across the country for a concert. But honestly I cant justify the $$$….

              Our Gas bill came and I nearly fell off my chair.We usually keep it off, until we cant stand it any longer, but its been freezing. So ive been turning it on in the mornings to 62*…..62* hahahahah. My blood has gotten so thin that any thing below 80 seems very cold.

              1. People make fun of me because I’m always wearing flannels and my fuzzy slippers when it dips into the 70s. They really think I’m an idiot when I wear my woolen hat and scarf when it’s 40. My blood thinned the day I stepped foot on Texas soil, and it’s been thinning every day since I came to south Florida lol. Around here, we can tell who lives here and who’s visiting by what they wear 😉 Our house doesn’t have heat or air, in the winter, I use the oven to warm the kitchen and use my heating pad when miss Jane Deere Kitty hasn’t taken it over 😉

                Sigh. I can’t afford to go anywhere either. it stinks, but such as life is right now. Hopefully things will get better. (((()))s girlie. xoxoxoo

                1. Thats a riot. Our dogs steal my husbands heating pad every night. Soooo hilarious.

                  About 15 years ago, we went to Hawaii, we frooze. It was 72-74 and gray skies every day. Oh geez. I wore a sweatshirt the entire time, and couldnt believe people were swimming.

                  We spent one winter in Montana when my husband had a job once and ooooooo my word. The house didnt have heat. Just a fireplace, and didnt do much good. By nov 10 the windows had 3 inch of solid ice on the iNSIDE. Brrrr cold just thinking about it.


                2. OH CRAP!!! No heat in MONTANA?!!! That’d kill me! LOL. I made my parents laugh when I told them I had an electric blanket now! A sweet friend and her husband gave it to me a few years ago when we had a real long and deep cold snap. She knows we have no heat, and it was dipping into the 20s and low teens every night. There are only so many fleece blankets you can pile on. I’ve loved that blanket every winter since! 😉

                  As for people swimming. LOL I know what you mean. Here, I won’t put my big toe in the water if the water temp is below 85! People swim here in January through March when it’s like 50!! What’re they, polar bears?!

                3. hahah- yep Im with you. My son swam for years and would brave the chilly temps when it would be 30 outside and the water would be barely 74, 75 …78 if he was lucky. Now after teaching all day he coachs and he says he just cant see how the swimmers do it. As a coach he can barely stand to be pacing on deck when it is 35 degrees and no sun…Because he freezes his butt off.

                4. PS when we traveled years ago, they had electric bed warmers. Not electric blankets but more like mattress pads. woooow.

                5. Oh, I forgot to mention I usually wear ugghs until it gets warm, and by warm I mean over 100*.
                  Have a great night- I HAVE to go do some cardio. Bleech.

      2. I’ve been seeing a pain management doc for a few months and the meds tire me out some times so the boss, in a rare moment of empathy, allowed me a few hours extra to go home and crash. But I’m fully refreshed and ready to attack again.

        Let’s get it rolling, Brother.

  36. Any thing (not a man) that beats up a woman like this needs seven colors of snot beat out of him! And yes… I said snot! 😉 I’ve never raised my hand to my wife and I never will.

  37. I despise all those who think this is an occasion for hilarity and finger-pointing, especially when there’s not a peep out of them when one of their own batters a young woman.

    I bet you anything that that dem hooligan will ‘inherit’ his father’s seat, when the time comes.

  38. Just proving what kind of people libs are. Not a shock to anyone here, I’m sure.

    Just wait till Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi die. I will be dancing in the streets in my boxer briefs do the snoopy dance. I may even fire an AK-47 into the air while ululating. Oh, wait, I forgot I can only do that AFTER converting to shiite islam. Sorry, no shooting, just snoopy dancing in my shorts.


      1. I will provide those photos just as soon as Harry Hitler and Nancy Braughan kick their respective buckets.


        1. That’s ok then!

          Was just worried about the sensitive soul of Smokey, because my housewolves usually give me a very stern look when I indulge in antics of any kind – and stalk out of the room …

          1. Shoot, you should see Smokey doing his “ballet” manuevers when he is in a good mood. He’s as crazy as his daddy is.

    1. LOL! That’s an erm… Interesting mental image right there… I’m torn… I don’t know whether to hope there is someone with a camera there to capture it… Or hoping to Goodness there isn’t! 🙂

  39. Calling off my divorce was one of the best things I ever did in my life. 1 year of marriage is a little short to decide to get a divorce IMO.

  40. You have got to believe that there is something fundamentally wrong with anybody who would celebrate this. Probably part of the Bill Maher crowd. Those leaches would celebrate anything.

  41. Well this is just pitiful. Anything to give libs joy. sigh.

    As for Moran’s son, I have a few gentlemen friends among my Scoopers who could teach this neanderthal some lessons on how to treat a woman.

    How ’bout it boys?

    1. I am not only included, I already know, in that list of yours but actively on the hunt for a conservative woman who wants to be treated as a special lady and a partner.

      Geez, sounds like a craigslist ad, doesn’t it? Well, hell, I’m not getting any younger.

        1. I know but I’d love to find “The one” and get on with it. Ya know what I mean? All you happily married people? Please, don’t take what you’ve found for granted. It isn’t easy to find in this day and age. Take my word on that.

            1. I just chalk it up to God’s plan. I don’t know what it is but I simply deal the obstacles he presents and move on. All in good time, I suppose.

                1. When you join the service and death becomes a very real possibility, you learn to trust God’s will and plans and no longer second guess or fret.

              1. I found a wonderful beautiful girl in church many moons ago, my heart still jump even this morning before we left to work. Nothing perfect, not a smooth ride every time. After 20 yrs. we decide to continue on in this exploration that we started when she was 20 and I were a year older than her.
                I think this is pretty good for me.

          1. That is spot on.

            Marriage takes work, it’s not always easy, but sticking it out, and above all sticking together to the end, til death, makes that final separation from that one, precious person, just a little bit easier to bear.

            1. Amen to that.

              My dad passed away last year at 92. Leaving my 89 year old mom. They were married 69 years. She’s doing ok but misses him terribly.

              1. Give my love to your dear mom – after such long marriage, she would miss your dad dearly. Yes, life goes on, but getting used to it is not at all easy.

                That’s why I’ve always cherished a piece of advice I got from a great-aunt: to collect good memories, because when one is old and alone, they are like a string of pearls one can take them out and look at them one by one.
                Then, I laughed – I was 17. Now I know she was right – fifty years on …

            2. Just as important, choose wisely. Not perfectly because there’s no such thing but if you have any doubts don’t marry that person. The doubts will triple in a few years.

              Mutual respect and mutual beliefs can ease a rough road until the bumps level out.

              1. Yes, absolutely!
                And of equal importance is that one can laugh at and about the same things.

                Oh, and btw: a marriage which is mostly about who’s done which chores and who should do what will end in tears.

                Finally: never ever go to bed after a fight without saying sorry.
                Even if you think/know that you were right.
                Always say sorry before lights out.

              1. One piece of advice from my Granny (Gawd – that’s soo last century!): once you stop looking for someone, the right someone will appear.

                Of course I didn’t believe her …. and then it happened just as she told me it would. I was 35, and yes, the long time alone was well worth it in the end.

                Hugs to you, keep on trucking!

                1. No worries, my adoptive Brit mum. That’s how I live my life anyway. I, frequently, on a weekend, will jump in my Jag and go for a drive with no particular place to go and see what happens. It usually ends in a fun social time, someplace.

                2. Excellent!

                  But remember – they’ve gotta pass the “Smokey Test”! If he don’t like them – run the other way!

                3. I NEVER, EVER discount the first opinion of dogs or young children about people. If the animal or the child doesn’t like them, there is a reason. They are NEVER wrong.

                4. This is so true! Both feel when people are faking, trying to being nice. Never fails.

                  And for me, living alone, having a growling housewolf at my side when someone approaches me in the street in the evening makes for great security!

                  (We’re not allowed to possess guns, never mind carry them!)

                5. I was under the impression that your wonderful government even tried to outlaw silverware as a fork and butter knife CAN be used in a crime. You’d have to eat everything with a plastic spork.

                6. Heh – they only outlawed that on airplanes: no proper knife and fork even on long-haul flights since 9/11.
                  Oh, and no drinks, no cosmetics, no baby food to be brought onto an airplane either.
                  Baby food is very explosive …

                  Mad world we’re living in.

                7. Yeah, it is infuriating, all this insanity. And with my background and training, a face palm or two doesn’t cover it. I have, on occasion, the desire to display my Marine Corps style bulldozer trick. That is where I go to the US Capitol and lower my head and run right the F through the freaking marble walls while growling and eyes glowing red.

                  The world is going nucking futs.

      1. Any bright, witty, beautiful Conservative woman would be LUCKY to have you my dear Marine! That’s just the truth of the matter. Ladies???

        1. Oh, Brother, if were only that easy. Sigh……..

          At least, I’ve got my wolf for company so I’m alone but never lonely.

          1. If I weren’t of an age to be your Mum, or even Granny …

            Give that Smokey a big hug: the four-legged companions can often be far more understanding than two-legged ones.
            And {{{{ }}}} to you, across the Big Pond!

                1. In that case, your daughter will have to drive to pick me up for our first date as I’m in Maryland. If she leaves now, she could be here by Wednesday.

                2. You guys don’t happen to be independantly wealthy and own a private jet, do you? Too much to ask for?


      2. How old are you? Where do you live? Do you like football and auto racing? do you know how to cook 🙂

        1. I am 42, live in Maryland, love football and auto racing and I am an excellent cook. I love to cook, it the clean up I dislike. If interested, ask ABin C for me email address. Carolyn, you may give it to celestiallady if she asks, ok?

          1. Oh gosh I am a bit older than you – like 20 years. Sob sob! Wouldn’t ya know. And at some point age does matter but I sure do wish you all the luck in the world. I bet you will have more responses. Blowing kisses!!!!

              1. Oh thank you. I am single and it is so hard to meet people. I am from Maine, but lived in Cali for most of my adult life. My best friend/love of my life passed away so I came back to Maine. It has it’s good points but not a good place for being single. I keep threatening to move but my kids really don’t like that idea. Mike sounds like such a sweetheart – my kind of guy. Oh well1 Now it’s my turn to go home – work day over. Will be here later.

            1. Thank you sweetheart. It just may not be in God’s plan for me so I’ll not worry about it.

              Darn shame, though. Sounds like we’d have been a good match.

            1. No problem, Dear. If I don’t get moderated and deleted once in a while I don’t feel like I’m doing my job properly. 😉

            1. I’m anything but perfect but this is a recurring, similar story I hear a lot. Thank you for the very nice compliment.

          2. My daughter loves football…huge fan! Not sure about the auto racing, she’s a good cook too, but the clean up part she doesn’t like either…that’s a lot in common, not sure if it’s good, that could make for a messy kitchen 😉

        1. Get my email from ABinC. I’d be happy to chat with her and see how things go. Especially, if I’e already been vetted by a parent! Wow.

            1. She’s a moderator. Once she’s on, just ask her to send my email to you. I’ve already given her permission. Just ask in a reply when you see her pop on. I think she can send you a blind message that no one else can see.

  42. It is a shame that one jumps at marriage for the sake of the child but fails to work on personal relationship such as the institution of marriage. It is easier to file for divorce than to truly work through problems to save relationship and/or family.

    1. Sexual revulsion > no fault divorce > trending moral crisis > the destruction of marriage and commitment.

      When we say that social issues don’t matter, and ignore them, we give approval to moral decadence.

Comments are closed.