We’ve been considered the paucity of support for the prohibition of homosexuality recently. It’s worth pointing out how clearly this contrasts with other prohibitions that are clear and unambiguous, but less embraced by most of your Xian moralists. So, in Matthew 19:9, we get — straight from the mouth of Jee-sus, the following:

And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Could it be any clearer? You can’t ditch your wife and marry another unless she’s been gettin’ it on the side, and you can’t marry a rejected wife (even if she was unfairly rejected) without likewise committing adultery. So, Xians, why doesn’t this get the same force as “no homo action”? (OK, the hardcore Cat-licker’s don’t allow divorce — and, with the recent scandals, seem OK with at least some dick-licking boys, and long as it’s kept quiet. Give them points for consistency, if not for morality.)2bxanax 2bmastercardalcohol addiction xanaxamish viagra usagemg xanax bars 1000about tramadol repent allactive ingredient in viagra2mg no membership xanaxviagra after Map