Hello again!

Shalom Kings & Queens of Light! I wanted to reintroduce myself since I have been MIA for over a year. First, I would like to say "thank you" to all who were at the Dallas Retreat in 2008. My husband & I truly enjoyed the fellowship! Second, thank you to all who contribute and coordinate to make this site a success.

At this time, I am married to a polygamist who is practicing monogamy in the DFW Metroplex of the great state of Texas. I am his 4th wife (by revelation), mother of two, sister to few and servant to all. I am striving to be counted amongst the wise and have a deep desire to succeed as a conduit of LIGHT by supplying mankind with truth and knowledge about elevation and transformation to the original state of being.

I would enjoy meeting new people, exchanging elevated thoughts and receiving/being support while navigating through the lies of today in this matrix, we call life.

Keywords: [tag]light[/tag], [tag]thank[/tag], [tag]state[/tag], [tag]hello[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]

[sourceurl]http://biblicalfamilies.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2068[/sourceurl]

[index]2068[/index]

Testimony

I have offered to testify at the Loy Nielsen trial in Texas. I contacted Kent Schaffer, the lead attorney defending Mr. Nielsen and offered to testify:

"Kent Schaffer <kentschaffer@gmail.com>

Dear Kent;

Thank you for continuing to receive my communications and taking a moment to consider them.

I have sent you many links and attached documents that I hope will help you make your case more effective, what I haven’t told you is my own story.

When my wife and I discussed children I told her I would rather not have any, or have at least 6. After our third child she had a tubal pregnancy and did not get pregnant after that. She has not had her period for two years now, and will not have any more children.

I am left with two alternatives if I want to have more children since I do not want to adopt:

1) "Cheat" on my wife and have "bastard" children with another woman and remain married to my first wife (she does not want a divorce).

2) Divorce my wife and marry another woman so that I have the opportunity to have more "legal" children.

Because of our laws I seemingly have no alternative but to "legally" divorce my wife to remove the government restrictions which prevent me from "legally" fathering children with another woman. Ironically I could have as many mistresses and father children with them with impunity as long as I help to support them (how sick is that?).

I say "legally" because I believe there is a separate and distinct difference between a state issued dog tag (license) for my wife and a covenant entered into between a man and a woman before God as our witness.

Malachi 2:14 But you say, "Why does he not?" Because the LORD was witness between you and the wife of your youth, to whom you have been faithless, though she is your companion and your wife by covenant.

Galatians 3:15 To give a human example, brothers: even with a man-made covenant, no one annuls it or adds to it once it has been ratifi…

Keywords: [tag]wife[/tag], [tag]children[/tag], [tag]state[/tag], [tag]license[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]

[sourceurl]http://biblicalfamilies.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1905[/sourceurl]

[index]1905[/index]

Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) Ruled Unconstitutional

"BOSTON — The federal law banning gay marriage is unconstitutional because it interferes with the right of a state to define the institution and therefore denies married gay couples some federal benefits, a federal judge ruled Thursday in Boston."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38155762/ns/us_news-life/

My first thought was "What right does a State actually have to define marriage in the first place, and why does it have any right to do so?"

Seeing that different religions have different marriage practices I don’t understand how a State can decide what marriage is and therefore define it, which would obviously violate the rights of some of the individuals of that State forcing them to follow a definition of marriage that is not supported by their religious doctrine. The Constitution specifically guarantees protection of the free practice of religion, and different religions have different definitions of marriage, therefore how is it possible for a State to definition marriage without forcing some of its residents to follow a religious doctrine different than what their religion allows.

As I thought about it, I wondered what the implications might be for "Biblical Marriage" because of the ruling. Most assuredly it is a blow to the ultra right wing "Christians" wanting marriage to be legally defined as one man and one woman only.

Your thoughts?

Keywords: [tag]marriage[/tag], [tag]state[/tag], [tag]different[/tag], [tag]right[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]

[sourceurl]http://biblicalfamilies.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1747[/sourceurl]

[index]1747[/index]

Taking Marriage Private Article

There has been a lot of discussion about seeking the state to grant PM the right to marry with the state license or with state recognition.

This article by a history scholar I think is helpful to the discussion. The idea of making marriage a state issue is a new idea with very little historical support. Maybe we should stop trying to support the state view and take the private view. Instead of trying to pressure legislators in the state or in Federal Congress to recognize PM as a marriage there seems to be a better way of approaching this subject. If all unions were contractually based then the families and religious groups could define them however they see fit and the state could simply look at unions as either business or personal contracts without getting into the definition of what is or is not a holy union before God, something the state here in America does not need to do since that is a religious issue where the state must remain neutral.

I think there is a much safer approach and one that can be won because it does not pit one group against another, and thus it is easier to gain support for this approach.

Dr. Allen

November 26, 2007
Op-Ed ContributorTaking Marriage Private By STEPHANIE COONTZ
Olympia, Wash.

WHY do people — gay or straight — need the state’s permission to marry? For most of Western history, they didn’t, because marriage was a private contract between two families. The parents’ agreement to the match, not the approval of church or state, was what confirmed its validity.

For 16 centuries, Christianity also defined the validity of a marriage on the basis of a couple’s wishes. If two people claimed they had exchanged marital vows — even out alone by the haystack — the Catholic Church accepted that they were validly married.

In 1215, the church decreed that a “licit” marriage must take place in church. But people who married illictly had the same rights and obligations as a couple married in church: their children were legitimate; the wife had the…

Keywords: [tag]marriage[/tag], [tag]state[/tag], [tag]married[/tag], [tag]license[/tag]

Site Description: Christianity forum

Category: [category]Religion[/category]

[sourceurl]http://biblicalfamilies.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1800[/sourceurl]

[index]1800[/index]