Skip to comments.Boy Scouts, Supreme Court Decision on Homosexuality Could Be Connected
Posted on 05/13/2013 4:56:18 PM PDT by lastmomstandingEdited on 05/13/2013 4:58:27 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Later this month, the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) will decide the most controversial issue in its 103 year history-namely, whether or not every chartered Boy Scout unit will be required to foster open homosexuality in their units by accepting "openly homosexual" boys.
Then about 30 days after the BSA decision, the nation will receive two key critical decisions from the US Supreme Court on same sex marriage that will have dramatic consequences on the entire country.
If you think it is just a coincidence that these two matters are being decided so closely to each other, one right after the other, on similar topics -- think again. It is strategic and calculated timing on the part of gay-rights operatives at the highest levels.
Sex deviates, Minorities, etc. are ALL now recieving special treatment, which includes Obamacare and Roberts crazy-ass Ruling on it.
The Robert's Court will go down in History as the worst case of shredding the Constitution in the 200+ years that America had previously existed.
There is no hope, IMHO, that ANY return to sanity and decent, responsible Citizenry will be occurring in MY lifetime. A Civil War is most-likely going to come even before my Grandchildren reach the age of adulthood, because the Parasites and Liberal fools who think they can sit on their asses, produce NOTHING, and live off others will have to start taking from Earners, when the Gubmint runs out of welfare benefits and food stamps.
Anybody who knows how the Constitution is supposed to work knows that the 10th Amendment was made to clarify that the Constitution's silence about things like marriage automatically makes marriage a 10th Amendment protected state power issue.
On the other hand, Constitution-ignoring activist justices may wrongly legislate from the bench and give the green light to the pro-homosexual agenda.
How does a 12 or 15 yr old boy "know" that he is homosexual? He has been molested by a homosexual and / or been initiated into homosexual behavior by a peer that has been molested by a homosexual.
He also may have been brainwashed into believing that he is homosexual by a deviant msm, entertainment industry and / or government education.
Whatever the reason these boys do not belong in the woods with other Scouts "exploring their sexuality".
We must not only accept homosexuality, we must celebrate it! Nothing less will be accepted.
In my opinion, some of them don’t really want that. I think the whole ‘gay marriage’/homosexual fight is to use the power of the state to punish and to be able to keep punishing those groups that will never buy into things like ‘gay marriage.’ They know that some groups will never change on it, so it will always be a club they can use.
I realize this, like the interstate commerce clause, has been interpreted overbroadly, but it still must be given some consideration.
A marriage in Massachusetts must be honored as a marriage in Utah, or not?
imho the supremes are going to vote against the homosexuals on this one.
I'm glad that you mentioned the full faith and credit clause, referred to as full faith clause in the remainder of this post. Based on the limited research that I've done concerning that clause, please consider the following example of where the full faith clause doesn't apply.
Before the National Minimum Drinking Age Act (NMDAA) of 1984 was passed, and I question the constitutionality of that law for reasons that i will state below, just because you were 18 years old or older, and a resident of a state where legal drinking age for alcoholic beverages was 18, the full faith clause didn't permit you to go to a state where legal drinking age is 21 and legally drink there too.
Likewise, since the states have never delegated to Congress the specific power to regulate marriage, other than a state that doesn't recognize gay marriage having to acknowledge the marriage of a gay couple married in another state, please consider the following. Since gay relationships are not expressly protected by the Constitution, the 14th Amendment requires the traditional marriage state only to apply its laws which discriminate against gay couples equally to all gay couples.
Regarding the constitutionality of the NMDAA, note that the states amended the Constitution to establish a minimum legal voting age, as opposed to Congress making a federal law to do so. And I give the generation of lawmakers that ratified the 26th Amendment more credit for knowing what they're doing with respect to amending the Constitution, as opposed to making a federal law to establish minimum voting age, any delegated constitutional powers upon which such a law is based not obvious.
As a side note regarding the NMDAA, please consider the following. That law evidently works by threating states with the loss of a percentage of federal highway funding if they don't enforce the act. I mention this because the states have never delegated to corrupt Congress via the Constitution the specific power to tax and spend to construct and maintain highways.