He thinks no such thing. If he did he would staunchly oppose this trend with his last breath.
Just another Liberal-lite.
Whew! That’s a relief. We don’t have to pay attention to “laws of the land” in this country now that Soetoro is on the throne.
Republicans really want to lose the mid-terms....
He said he believes nobody should suffer discrimination, and said religious people should try to understand other people’s beliefs. …
Tolerance is a one way street.
I can remember when this guy was a Mr "I love Ronald Reagan" Conservative. How things change.
The homosexual community has achieved great wealth, power and influence in modern day America. They very well may have the power to overturn civil laws and enact new ones to their liking. However the bottom line is that the inherent vile nature of homosexuality will never change. Its acceptance into American culture along with widespread abortion, drug use, pornography and fornication underscores the reality that America has entered an era of neo pagan epicurean decadence.
Does he also think that other people should try to understand religious people’s beliefs? Or is it just that we have to bend over backwards to accomodate liberal beliefs on marriage?
I’m just waiting to see if the LGBT peoples start suing churches over homosexual marriage. We will have a big split in our culture, in which homosexual marriage is permitted in civil law, but virtually all mainstream religious denominations do not allow it.
The liberals and gay activists have lied about their true intentions all along. First they wanted tolerance. Then they wanted legal rights for civil unions, and said they didn’t want marriage. Then they said that they only wanted marriage in certain states, and had no intention of overturning the Defense of Marriage Act in court. They say they don’t intend to sue churches, but considering how they have lied time and time again about their true intentions in this area, I don’t trust them.
And this is where who sits in our federal courts is important. Liberal judges will likely allow lawsuits and rule against religious institutions which will not permit homosexual marriage. It could happen.
This is the kind of mush headed thinking you fall into when you have been in Washington to long.
Term limits before they all go senile.
So, does he agree that it’s in the US Constitution? That’s where the activist judges keep finding it.
Someone should tell Orrin that no one has been discriminated against in the subject of marriage.
Marriage being DEFINED as between a man and a woman.
Any homosexual who decided he was done with that charming little perversion has always been free to marry the equally twisted skank of his choice.
What the odious Mr. Hatch should be asking is why we have allowed the judgeocracy to change the law by changing the definition of marriage.
But perhaps his acquiescence in this matter is a secret revenge of the Mormons: we were persecuted because of polygamy. Common cause with the Homonazis?
He’s the sort of Washington insider who sees the Progressive agenda working through our massive government, and sees inevitability.
In a way he’s right - our massive, debt financed, nanny-state, founded on printed money is rolling toward a logical conclusion
It doesn’t mean he shouldn’t give us an alternative.
The obvious agenda of the radical homosexual movement is to FORCE Churches to affirm, celebrate and approve that which their logic, conscience, faith and Scripture opposes.
And thus what you (Orrin) cowardly resign yourself to as inevitable as the 'law of the land' will thus prohibit the free exercise of an authentic Christian faith and violate the very CORE of the Constitution that you pledged to defend upon taking office.
Hatch is ASSUMING only religion is the reason for objecting to anything goes sex fetish marriage.
There are LOGICAL NON-RELIGIOUS reasons to protect marriage from the hedonists. The fact it is homosexual deathstyle judges making these rulings speaks volumes.
WHERE was hatch on the federal marriage amendment?
Hatch is just a DC insider do nothing stooge.
The next thing they want is pedophilia.
Given that gays don’t produce the future of society, I can’t fathom why they would get the same benefits. And where does the money come from as this puts more of a strain on Social Security and the private sector.
Our flag is Old Glory.
The flag of the Republican establishment is the white flag of surrender.
understand other people’s beliefs. …
Sure now understand my beliefs.
For Rent no gays
The SCOTUS holding in “Windsor” that dismantled DOMA was based on the presumption that DOMA was enacted for no other reason than animus against people with sexual confusion/homosexual disorder.
A good lawyer can make the secular case, that has nothing to do with animus, for why in the whole history of civilization across all cultures, marriage has been defined as the union of a man and a woman. Heck, a bad lawyer could do it.
Hatch is probably correct. Gay “marriage” will be recognized as if it was the real thing in all 50 states. Similarly, I will eventually die. Both statements are almost certainly true, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to help either unpleasant outcome along. God didn’t put me here to squander whatever time He might allot me, nor did He put me here to further a destructive agenda that will separate people from scripture.