BibleSays... wrote: John Yurich, You apparently don't know a thing about homeschooling. I was homeschooled and have homeschooled my kids and we did about nine or more months per year of school! Not these fairy tale halvsies you dream about. Every other homeschooler I know does about the same thing. You cannot cram the kind of work required into a six month frame, it simply doesn't work.
This is a free country and I don't have to follow the nine month time frame for homeschooling when I get married and have children. And besides the children will continue to learn things in the six months they are off of school by watching 16MM movies that I have on various science subjects like Geology and Rock Formation and by watching VHS videos of the Civil War and science subjects like Physics.
Homeschooling is good for children. When I get married and children they will be homeschooled. The school year will begin after Labor Day and end on 1 March so the children have six months of schooling and six months of vacation.
Rodney K. wrote: This is what happens when a denomination refuses to anchor their beliefs in the inerrant Word of God.
Correct. The Catholic Church is against fruitcake marriage and will always be against fruitcake marriage because the Catholic Church accepts what the Bible states about fruitcakeness being an abomination before God and that marriage is between a man and a woman only.
Jim Lincoln wrote: it would be interesting to know how many of these judges were Roman Catholic?albeit they may be moderate ones, since the more conservative Catholic judges on the Supreme Court were not so anxious to overturn DOMA. But looking at another issue there is a strong Romish pushing the agenda of getting rid of the judeo-christian practice of capital punishment, q.v., Catholic Church and politics in the United States. these activist are just as bad!
All liberal Catholics should be excommunicated from the Catholic Church.
Jim Lincoln wrote: John Y., everyone knows who I mean when I refer to Bush Jr., the idiot son of Bush Sr.
It is totally superfluous if everybody knows who you mean when you erroneously refer to GW Bush as Bush Jr. and GHW Bush as Bush Sr. It is legally inaccurate to refer to them as Jr. and Sr. because legally they are not Jr. and Sr. Why are you incapable of comprehending that and not say Jr. and Sr. when referring to GW Bush and GHW Bush? Anybody with a normal brain would not keep eroneously stating Jr. and Sr. when referring to GW Bush and GHW Bush if they know that they are not legally Jr. and Sr.
Jim Lincoln wrote: How I used the Bush Jr., is a good shorthand way of referring to the idiot son of the elder Bush. I think everyone realizes that.
Why not state GW Bush when referring to the son and GHW Bush when referring to the father? That would be more accurate then stating Bush Jr. and Bush Sr. because any attorney would tell you that legally they are not Jr. and Sr. because they don't have the same middle name. And nobody but you on here believes it is accurate to refer to them as Jr. and Sr. because everybody else but you on here knows that legally they are not Jr. and Sr. if they don't have the same middle name.
Jim Lincoln wrote: what is interestingthis judge was appointed by Bush Jr. So, he had a lot of interesting appointments. it would be interesting if he were Catholic or not. I notice that Catholic judges no matter what the party are following their churches agenda of being anti Christianand trying to abolish the capital punishment practicepractice,q.v., Rendering To Caesar---A Biblical Perspective On Government. you give them any excuse, especially one that looks fairly reasonable like the one in California,you can expect they'll find some way to notify the death penalty.
Are you not capable of comprehension at all? Why do you keep stating Bush Jr when referring to George Walker Bush? Legally Bush and his father are not Sr. and Jr. because they have different middle names. Ask any attorney and they will tell you the same thing. I have been wondering for years why it takes so long for prisoners to be executed in California?