Kaip monsinjoras Kazimieras Vasiliauskas sutuokė gėjus

kartu pritariu 31 komentarui!

manau,kad spekuliuoti tokiu pasakymu labai gejams budinga,nes monsinjoras mires,ka beirodysi.Ju propagandos metodai- kuo daugiau zymiu zmoniu paskelbti gejais,ypac,kai ju nebera gyvuju tarpe ir jei nebegali to paneigti. Paskaitykite literatura,- tai vienas is geju propagandos metodu,gaila,kad TV tokius dalykus pateikia kaip tikra fakta.

visos santuokos yra oficiailiai užregistruotos bažnytinių aktų knygose.Lapėnienės melą lengva įrodyti.Manau, Bažnyčios tarnų garbės reikalas tai paneigti. Ir kuo greičiau

pritariu 25-am. Puikiai pasakyta! Reikia perversmo

3 gegutės priešaky-tai manau,kad jom su proteliu ne viskas tvarkoj,nes neabejoju,kad jos serga viena liga-nedapistitu

ir toliau gali mulkinti žmones,kad reik iškrypėlius ale toleruoti,bet dievas išsako ką kita.Tai liga ir iškrypimas.Įdomu,kaip nubaus ruskelį už eitynių melagingą tikslą?Kaip tada atsakys teismas,kuris tai leido?Man atrodo,kad laikas bręsta nuversti iškrypėlių ir nusikaltėlių valdžią

Pritariu 24.

Prime Minister Orbán’s closing speech in the European Parliament, 2 July 2013 With respect to curtailing freedom, distinguished Ladies and Gentlemen, I see that there are some, who do not understand quite clearly the Hungarian nation and the character of Hungarian people. Even the Soviets failed to curtail freedom in Hungary, not even the Communists succeeded. We sent them packing at the first possible moment. Therefore to say that someone would be capable of curtailing the freedom of the Hungarian people is a sign of misconceptions regarding the Hungarian nation. There was a contribution, which if I understood correctly talked about LGBT groups, and which if I understood correctly concerned the rights of homosexuals. I would like to make it very clear. We have very clear constitutional provisions in Hungary. Marriage and a family mean a man and a woman, and one of each. One man and one woman. This is not directed against anybody. The fact is that we are protecting a four thousand year old tradition. We can argue about whether this tradition should be maintained, but I would ask that you accept one thing. This is a 4000 year old tradition. 2000 years in the Jewish culture and 2000 years in Christianity. We would simply like to preserve this tradition, and therefore I do not understand why any MEP should think that our right to this tradition in Hungary could possibly be restricted. The Hungarian constitution is not against anybody, but also speaks clearly. /.../ Ladies and Gentlemen, There was an interesting debate here about the connection between the European Parliament and the Soviet Union. This is an interesting issue, the comparison between Brussels and Moscow. There is no doubt that I would not have had the opportunity to put forward my opinion in Moscow during the Soviet era. Even if by a stroke of luck I would have been allowed to do so, I am not sure that I would have been allowed to return home. Accordingly, one can assume that the two entities are not same. There is something however that I would like to mention in a more subtle manner. We remember well when the decisions on Hungarian freedom and the fate of Hungary were not left to the Hungarians. We also know full well that – just as you are doing now – other people in another place wanted to protect us from ourselves. Hungarians do not need to be protected from themselves. Hungarians are freedom loving and democratic people, who are capable of deciding about their own destiny, as long as they are allowed to do so! Ladies and Gentlemen, In summary, I must say that the report, which you are debating, is seriously unfair and insulting towards my country. Its author and all those who will approve it are abusing their power, are applying double standards against my country, and therefore I naturally do not see any reason to change the opinion I articulated at the opening of this debate. Naturally, when a Parliament adopts a resolution, it will do so on a party political basis, thus in a legitimate manner. I am not in a position, nor do I have the right to question the legitimacy of the Parliament resolution to be made here tomorrow, but it goes with the character of every parliamentary political resolution that it will be political in nature. This is going to be a resolution which will be strongly biased to the left and as is the case with parliamentary resolutions, the prosecutor and the judge will be one and the same. Those accusing us will vote in majority to adopt a resolution condemning us, therefore I am not in a position to accept such a resolution on behalf of Hungary. Many say that they are our friends, but they will be voting against us. They say that friends are there to share their criticism with their other friends and, Mr. President, there is a lot of truth in this. I would be grateful if you told us your criticisms, but you do not share your criticism with us, but instead, in this report, you are proposing to put Hungary under political guardianship and I can never accept you wanting to put my country under political guardianship. Hungary is a free country, and therefore we do not accept this report. Thank you for your kind attention. Prime Minister’s Office h t t p://orbanviktor.hu/in_english_article/prime_minister_orban_s_closing_speech_in_the_european_parliament