Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay-Rights Groups Eye Conservative Split
Miami Herald ^ | January 12, 2004

Posted on 01/12/2004 6:06:02 AM PST by NYer

NEW YORK - Intrigued by divisions within conservative ranks, gay-rights strategists are trying to portray a proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage as a radical step that true conservatives should oppose.

The Human Rights Campaign, a national gay rights group, is targeting conservatives with a radio and print ad campaign starting Monday in 10 areas, including Omaha, Neb.; Indianapolis; Tampa, Fla.; Milwaukee; Las Vegas; and Philadelphia.

"Be conservative with the Constitution," the ads say. "Don't amend it."

Disagreements among conservatives have emerged in recent months over the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would stipulate that marriage is only between a man and woman.

Some want the measure toughened so it would bar same-sex civil unions and domestic partnerships as well as gay marriages. Other conservatives, including several prominent columnists and politicians, say the Constitution is the wrong place to address contentious social problems and contend the measure would infringe on states' rights.

The critics include former U.S. Rep. Bob Barr, R-Ga., who called the amendment "needlessly intrusive," and columnist George Will, who said it would unwisely override state responsibility for marriage law.

Tony Perkins, president of the pro-amendment Family Research Council, said he respected some of the criticism. However, he said the amendment was the only effective option now that the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled the state cannot deny marriage rights to same-sex couples.

"It's no longer a theoretical discussion about 'What ifs?'" Perkins said in a telephone interview. "It's a public policy crisis."

President Bush addressed the issue during an interview with ABC News last month, but his comments confused and dismayed many conservative activists.

On the one hand, Bush said, "If necessary, I will support a constitutional amendment which would honor marriage between a man and a woman, codify that."

However, in what some conservatives perceived as an endorsement of civil unions, Bush added, "The position of this administration is that whatever legal arrangements people want to make, they're allowed to make, so long as it's embraced by the state or at the state level."

Among the conservative leaders disappointed by that remark was Gary Bauer, president of American Values. "His unfortunate statement undermines pro-family conservatives around the country who are working in state legislatures to prevent such 'fake marriages' from being forced on the American people," Bauer said in a statement.

As introduced in Congress, the Federal Marriage Amendment was designed to ban gay marriage but leave open the possibility that state lawmakers approve civil unions or domestic partnerships extending some marriage-like rights to same-sex couples.

New Jersey's legislature has just approved a domestic partnership law, joining California and Hawaii. Vermont has marriage-like civil unions.

The $350,000 advertising effort of the Human Rights Campaign - which will include radio ads on conservative talk shows - is one of the first initiatives undertaken under its new president, former Massachusetts State Sen. Cheryl Jacques.

In a telephone interview, Jacques said she was struck by the disunity among conservatives regarding the marriage amendment.

"We can all have different positions on the underlying issue," she said. "But at the end of the day, there are many conservatives who come down on the side of 'Don't mess with the Constitution.'"

One of the ads, to run in Indiana, depicts a farmer musing, "Once the politicians start using the Constitution to take away rights, I wonder which ones they'll go after next."

Though the leading Democratic presidential candidates have balked at endorsing gay marriage, Jacques said she is pleased that they support civil unions. As for Bush, Jacques suggested he might try to avoid the divisive topic as much as possible during his re-election campaign.

ON THE NET

Human Rights Campaign: http://www.hrc.org

Family Research Council: http://www.frc.org


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; US: Florida; US: Indiana; US: Minnesota; US: Nevada; US: Pennsylvania; US: Wisconsin
KEYWORDS: amendment; conservative; constitution; frc; gayrights; homosexualagenda; lavendermafia; marriage; marriageamendment; prisoners; propaganda
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last
To: Cathryn Crawford
If the choice was between leaving gay marriage to the states or making it a federal issue, many of us might agree.

However, once the U.S. Supreme Court edict comes down, ordering all fifty states to permit gay marriage, the issue of federalism will already have been breached.

Think back to, let's say, 1967. Suppose someone saw Roe vs. Wade coming, and proposed a constitutional amendment to ban abortion. People such as yourself might have opposed it, arguing that abortion should be a state issue. But once Roe came down, the feds took over the issue anyway, in a way that expanded federal power far beyond the abortion issue itself.

If we don't pass an amendment to ban gay marriage, the result won't be a "leave it to the states" policy. The result will be a federal judicial fiat forcing all fifty states to alter their marriage laws to accept gay marriage, which in turn will lead to additional fiats imposing gay adoption, gay child counselors, etc. on the states.
21 posted on 01/12/2004 11:07:41 AM PST by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping - I haven't read this yet, but I can tell it is a MUST READ! They "gay" agenda strategy - learn what it is and fight back. I am thinking of the adage - the best defense is OFFENSE! Time to take the fight to them. Conservatives need to publicize what homosexuals DO, what they WANT, what their stated PLANS and OBJECTIVES are.

Let them be on the defensive. There is no other way to win this.

Let me know if you want on or off this ping list!
22 posted on 01/12/2004 11:42:06 AM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Thanks very much for keeping me alerted about these matters. I haven't had as much time as I would like to peruse FR, so this really helps!!


little jeremiah
23 posted on 01/12/2004 11:43:33 AM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
It's not about that; it's just about taking something too far (a Constitutional amendment), when it's something that can be decided state to state.

Unfortunately, that's not where this is going. Given the chance the Supreme Court will mandate nationwide homosexual marriage with the stroke of a pen. No one familiar with this court's decisions can doubt it for a moment. The states will not be allowed to make the decision, because the overwhelming number of them would choose not to enact homosexual marriage.

In my opinion, your position is like bringing a knife to a gun fight.

24 posted on 01/12/2004 11:52:53 AM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
If we must regulate this at a federal level, why can't we use a regular statute to do so?

Because the Supreme Court, in its present make-up, would declare it unconstitutional.

25 posted on 01/12/2004 11:53:57 AM PST by Zack Nguyen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
All conservatives should understand what is at stake. In other words, what is the likely result if gay marriage becomes the law in Massachusetts? Which of the following outcomes is the most likely result if we don't pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage?

1) Massachusetts legalizes gay marriage, but nothing happens in the other 49 states. Gay marriage remains banned in them.

2) Massachusetts legalizes gay marriage, and a few other "liberal" states follow their lead when their state courts impose gay marriage on them. But gay marriage remains banned in the remained of the states.

3) Massachusetts legalizes gay marriage, and the U.S. Supreme Court, via the full faith & credit clause, forces the other 49 states to legalize such marriages as well. This leads to further decisions over the next few years ordering the states to permit gay adoption, hire gay school counselors, challenging the tax exempt status of churches that don't perform gay marriages, and more.

I submit that #3 is not only most likely, it's a virual certainty.

So much for federalism.
26 posted on 01/12/2004 11:58:05 AM PST by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
"remained" should be "remainder". Sorry for the typo!
27 posted on 01/12/2004 11:59:37 AM PST by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: NYer
#####Gay-Rights Groups Eye Conservative Split#####


In essence, the title of this article is telling us that the gay activists are counting on some conservatives to join them in blocking a federal amendment to ban gay marriage, which will allow them to use the courts to impose such marriages on all the states via a federal judicial fiat.

The "conservatives" who oppose this amendment are the same types who advised Bush to sign McCain-Feingold.
28 posted on 01/12/2004 12:11:30 PM PST by puroresu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
"We can all have different positions on the underlying issue," she said. "But at the end of the day, there are many conservatives who come down on the side of 'Don't mess with the Constitution."

But at the end of the day, after granting constitutional protection to homosexual deviation, here is what you will get . .

Mass. Supreme Court Rules - Gay Couples have the Right to Marry

=====================================================================================================================================================

Throughout history, the major civilizations major religions condemned homosexuality.1 Until 1961 homosexual acts were illegal throughout America.

Gays claim that the "prevailing attitude toward homosexuals in the U.S. and many other countries is revulsion and hostility....for acts and desires not harmful to anyone."3 The American Psychological Association and the American Public Health Association assured the U.S. Supreme Court in 1986 that "no significant data show that engaging in...oral and anal sex, results in mental or physical dysfunction."4

What Homosexuals Do

The major surveys on homosexual behavior are summarized below. Two things stand out 1) homosexuals behave similarly world-over, and 2) as Harvard Medical Professor, Dr. William Haseltine,33 noted in 1993, the "changes in sexual behavior that have been reported to have occurred in some groups have proved, for the most part, to be transient. For example, bath houses and sex clubs in many cities have either reopened or were never closed."

Homosexual Activities (in %)

		US16 US13  US    US18 Denmark20 US19  London27  Sydney/London26                                                            Canada25                                                      
		1940s1977 83/84  1983  1984   1983    1985       1991                       
		ever ever  ever in yr in yr  in mo   in mo   last 6mo                                                                                  
oral/penile       83   99  100/99  99    86             67                 
anal/penile       68   91   93/98  95    92     95     100                 
oral/anal         59   83   92/92  63           69      89       55/65       
urine sex         10   23    29/                                              
fisting/toys      22   41/47 34                                       
fecal sex-eating        4     8                                                       
enemas        	       11    11                                               
torture sex       22   37    37                                              
public/orgy sex   61   76    88                                               
sex with minors   37   23    24/                                          

ORAL SEX Homosexuals fellate almost all of their sexual contacts (and ingest semen from about half of these). Semen contains many of the germs carried in the blood. Because of this, gays who practice oral sex verge on consuming raw human blood, with all its medical risks. Since the penis often has tiny lesions (and often will have been in unsanitary places such as a rectum), individuals so involved may become infected with hepatitis A or gonorrhea (and even HIV and hepatitis B). Since many contacts occur between strangers (70% of gays estimated that they had had sex only once with over half of their partners17,27), and gays average somewhere between 106 and 1105 different partners/year, the potential for infection is considerable.

RECTAL SEX Surveys indicate that about 90% of gays have engaged in rectal intercourse, and about two-thirds do it regularly. In a 6-month long study of daily sexual diaries,3 gays averaged 110 sex partners and 68 rectal encounters a year.

Rectal sex is dangerous. During rectal intercourse the rectum becomes a mixing bowl for 1) saliva and its germs and/or an artificial lubricant, 2) the recipient's own feces, 3) whatever germs, infections or substances the penis has on it, and 4) the seminal fluid of the inserter. Since sperm readily penetrate the rectal wall (which is only one cell thick) causing immunologic damage, and tearing or bruising of the anal wall is very common during anal/penile sex, these substances gain almost direct access to the blood stream. Unlike heterosexual intercourse (in which sperm cannot penetrate the multilayered vagina and no feces are present),7 rectal intercourse is probably the most sexually efficient way to spread hepatitis B, HIV syphilis and a host of other blood-borne diseases.

Tearing or ripping of the anal wall is especially likely with "fisting," where the hand and arm is inserted into the rectum. It is also common when "toys" are employed (homosexual lingo for objects which are inserted into the rectum--bottles, carrots, even gerbils8). The risk of contamination and/or having to wear a colostomy bag from such "sport" is very real. Fisting was apparently so rare in Kinsey's time that he didn't think to talk about it. By 1977, well over a third of gays admitted to doing it. The rectum was not designed to accommodate the fist, and those who do so can find themselves consigned to diapers for life.

FECAL SEX About 80% of gays (see Table) admit to licking and/or inserting their tongues into the anus of partners and thus ingesting medically significant amounts of feces. Those who eat or wallow in it are probably at even greater risk. In the diary study,5 70% of the gays had engaged in this activity--half regularly over 6 months. Result? --the "annual incidence of hepatitis A in...homosexual men was 22 percent, whereas no heterosexual men acquired hepatitis A." In 1992,26 it was noted that the proportion of London gays engaging in oral/anal sex had not declined since 1984.

While the body has defenses against fecal germs, exposure to the fecal discharge of dozens of strangers each year is extremely unhealthy. Ingestion of human waste is the major route of contracting hepatitis A and the enteric parasites collectively known as the Gay Bowel Syndrome. Consumption of feces has also been implicated in the transmission of typhoid fever,9 herpes, and cancer.27 About 10% of gays have eaten or played with [e.g., enemas, wallowing in feces]. The San Francisco Department of Public Health saw 75,000 patients per year, of whom 70 to 80 per cent are homosexual men....An average of 10 per cent of all patients and asymptomatic contacts reported...because of positive fecal samples or cultures for amoeba, giardia, and shigella infections were employed as food handlers in public establishments; almost 5 per cent of those with hepatitis A were similarly employed."10 In 1976, a rare airborne scarlet fever broke out among gays and just missed sweeping through San Francisco.10 The U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that 29% of the hepatitis A cases in Denver, 66% in New York, 50% in San Francisco, 56% in Toronto, 42% in Montreal and 26% in Melbourne in the first six months of 1991 were among gays.11 A 1982 study "suggested that some transmission from the homosexual group to the general population may have occurred."12

URINE SEX About 10% of Kinsey's gays reported having engaged in "golden showers" [drinking or being splashed with urine]. In the largest survey of gays ever conducted,13 23% admitted to urine-sex. In the largest random survey of gays,6 29% reported urine-sex. In a San Francisco study of 655 gays,14 only 24% claimed to have been monogamous in the past year. Of these monogamous gays, 5% drank urine, 7% practiced "fisting," 33% ingested feces via anal/oral contact, 53% swallowed semen, and 59% received semen in their rectum during the previous month.

OTHER GAY SEX PRACTICES

SADOMASOCHISM as the Table indicates, a large minority of gays engage in torture for sexual fun. Sex with minors 25% of white gays17 admitted to sex with boys 16 or younger as adults. In a 9-state study,30 33% of the 181 male, and 22% of the 18 female teachers caught molesting students did so homosexually (though less than 3% of men and 2% of women engage in homosexuality31). Depending on the study, the percent of gays reporting sex in public restrooms ranged from 14%16 to 41%13 to 66%,6 9%16, 60%13 and 67%5 reported sex in gay baths; 64%16 and 90%18 said that they used illegal drugs.

Fear of AIDS may have reduced the volume of gay sex partners, but the numbers are prodigious by any standard. Morin15 reported that 824 gays had lowered their sex-rate from 70 different partners/yr. in 1982 to 50/yr. by 1984. McKusick14 reported declines from 76/yr. to 47/yr. in 1985. In Spain32 the average was 42/yr. in 1989.

Medical Consequences of Homosexual Sex

Death and disease accompany promiscuous and unsanitary sexual activity. 70%25 to 78%x,13 of gays reported having had a sexually transmitted disease. The proportion with intestinal parasites (worms, flukes, amoeba) ranged from 25%18 to 39%19 to 59%.20 As of 1992, 83% of U.S. AIDS in whites had occurred in gays.21 The Seattle sexual diary study3? reported that gays had, on a yearly average:

  1. fellated 108 men and swallowed semen from 48;
  2. exchanged saliva with 96;
  3. experienced 68 penile penetrations of the anus; and
  4. ingested fecal material from 19.

No wonder 10% came down with hepatitis B and 7% contracted hepatitis A during the 6-month study.

Effects on the Lifespan

Smokers and drug addicts don't live as long as non-smokers or non-addicts, so we consider smoking and narcotics abuse harmful. The typical life-span of homosexuals suggests that their activities are more destructive than smoking nd as dangerous as drugs.

Obituaries numbering 6,516 from 16 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 12 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers.23 The obituaries from the regular newspapers were similar to U.S. averages for longevity; the medium age of death of married men was 75, and 80% of them died old (age 65 or older). For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57, and 32% of them died old. Married women averaged age 79 at death; 85% died old. Unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71, and 60% of them died old.

The median age of death for homosexuals, however, was virtually the same nationwide--and, overall, less than 2% survived to old age. If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39. For the 829 gays who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was 42, and 9% died old. The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of 44, and 20% died old.

Two and eight-tenths percent (2.8%) of gays died violently. They were 116 times more apt to be murdered; 24 times more apt to commit suicide; and had a traffic-accident death-rate 18 times the rate of comparably-aged white males. Heart attacks, cancer and liver failure were exceptionally common. Twenty percent of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accident--a rate 487 times higher than that of white females aged 25-44. The age distribution of samples of homosexuals in the scientific literature from 1989 to 1992 suggests a similarly shortened life-span.

The Gay Legacy

Homosexuals rode into the dawn of sexual freedom and returned with a plague that gives every indication of destroying most of them. Those who treat AIDS patients are at great risk, not only from HIV infection, which as of 1992 involved over 100 health care workers,21 but also from TB and new strains of other diseases.24 Those who are housed with AIDS patients are also at risk.24 Those who are housed with AIDS patients are also at risk.24 Dr. Max Essex, chair of the Harvard AIDS Institute, warned congress in 1992 that "AIDS has already led to other kinds of dangerous epidemics...If AIDS is not eliminated, other new lethal microbes will emerge, and neither safe sex nor drug free practices will prevent them."28 At least 8, and perhaps as many as 30 29 patients had been infected with HIV by health care workers as of 1992.

The Biological Swapmeet

The typical sexual practices of homosexuals are a medical horror story --imagine exchanging saliva, feces, semen and/or blood with dozens of different men each year. Imagine drinking urine, ingesting feces and experiencing rectal trauma on a regular basis. Often these encounters occur while the participants are drunk, high, and/or in an orgy setting. Further, many of them occur in extremely unsanitary places (bathrooms, dirty peep shows), or, because homosexuals travel so frequently, in other parts of the world.

Every year, a quarter or more of homosexuals visit another country.20 Fresh American germs get taken to Europe, Africa and Asia. And fresh pathogens from these continents come here. Foreign homosexuals regularly visit the U.S. and participate in this biological swapmeet.

The Pattern of Infection

Unfortunately the danger of these exchanges does not merely affect homosexuals. Travelers carried so many tropical diseases to New York City that it had to institute a tropical disease center, and gays carried HIV from New York City to the rest of the world.27 Most of the 6,349 Americans who got AIDS from contaminated blood as of 1992, received it from homosexuals and most of the women in California who got AIDS through heterosexual activity got it from men who engaged in homosexual behavior.23 The rare form of airborne scarlet fever that stalked San Francisco in 1976 also started among homosexuals.10

Genuine Compassion

Society is legitimately concerned with health risks-- they impact our taxes and everyone's chances of illness and injury. Because we care about them, smokers are discouraged from smoking by higher insurance premiums, taxes on cigarettes and bans against smoking in public. These social pressures cause many to quit. They likewise encourage non-smokers to stay non-smokers.

Homosexuals are sexually troubled people engaging in dangerous activities. Because we care about them and those tempted to join them, it is important that we neither encourage nor legitimize such a destructive lifestyle.


References

1. Karlen A. SEXUALITY And HOMOSEXUALITY. NY Norton, 1971.

2. Pines B. BACK TO BASICS. NY Morrow, 1982, p. 211.

3. Weinberg G. SOCIETY AND THE HEALTHY HOMOSEXUAL. NY St. Martin's, 1972, preface.

4. Amici curiae brief, in Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986.

5. Corey L. & Holmes, K.K. Sexual transmission of Hepatitis A in homosexual men. "New England Journal of Medicine," 1980302435- 38.

6. Cameron P et al Sexual orientation and sexually transmitted disease. "Nebraska Medical Journal," 198570292-99; Effect of homosexuality upon public health and social order "Psychological Reports," 1989, 64, 1167-79.

7. Manligit, G.W. et al Chronic immune stimulation by sperm alloan- tigens. "Journal of the American Medical Association," 1984251 237-38.

8. Cecil Adams, "The Straight Dope," THE READER (Chicago, 3/28/86) [Adams writes authoritatively on counter-culture material, his column is carried in many alternative newspapers across the U.S. and Canada].

9. Dritz, S. & Braff. Sexually transmitted typhoid fever. "New England Journal of Medicine," 19772961359-60.

10. Dritz, S. Medical aspects of homosexuality. "New England Journal of Medicine," 1980302463-4.

11. CDC Hepatitis A among homosexual men --United States, Canada, and Australia. MMWR 199241155-64.

12. Christenson B. et al. An epidemic outbreak of hepatitis A among homosexual men in Stockholm, "American Journal of Epidemiology," 1982115599-607.

13. Jay, K. & Young, A. THE GAY REPORT. NY Summit, 1979.

14. McKusick, L. et al AIDS and sexual behaviors reported by gay men in San Francisco, "American Journal of Public Health," 1985 75493- 96.

15. USA Today 11/21/84.

16. Gebhard, P. & Johnson, A. THE KINSEY DATA. NY Saunders, 1979.

17. Bell, A. & Weinberg, M. HOMOSEXUALITIES. NY Simon & Schuster, 1978.

18. Jaffee, H. et al. National case-control study of Kaposi's sarcoma. "Annals Of Internal Medicine," 198399145-51.

19. Quinn, T. C. et al. The polymicrobial origin of intestinal infection in homosexual men. "New England Journal of Medicine," 1983309576-82.

20. Biggar, R. J. Low T-lymphocyte ratios in homosexual men. "Journal Of The American Medical Association," 19842511441-46; "Wall Street Journal," 7/18/91, B1.

21. CDC HIV/AIDS SURVEILLANCE, February 1993.

22. Chu, S. et al. AIDS in bisexual men in the U.S. "American Journal Of Public Health," 199282220-24.

23. Cameron, P., Playfair, W. & Wellum, S. The lifespan of homo- sexuals. Paper presented at Eastern Psychological Association Convention, April 17, 1993.

24. Dooley, W.W. et al. Nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis in a hospital unit for HIV-invected patients. "Journal of the American Medical Association," 19922672632-35.

25. Schechter, M.T. et al. Changes in sexual behavior and fear of AIDS. "Lancet," 198411293.

26. Elford, J. et al. Kaposi's sarcoma and insertive rimming. "Lancet," 1992339938.

27. Beral, V. et al. Risk of Kaposi's sarcoma and sexual practices associated with faecal contact in homosexual or bisexual men with AIDS. "Lancet," 1992339632-35.

28. Testimony before House Health & Environment Subcommittee, 2/24/92.

29. Ciesielski, C. et al. Transmission of human immunodeficiency virus in a dental practice. "Annals of Internal Medicine, 1992116 798-80; CDC Announcement Houston Post, 8/7/92.

30. Rubin, S. "Sex Education Teachers Who Sexually Abuse Students." 24th International Congress on Psychology, Sydney, Australia, August 1988.

31. Cameron, P. & Cameron, K. Prevalence of homosexuality. "Psychology Reports," 1993, in press; Melbye, M. & Biggar, R.J. Interactions between persons at risk for AIDS and the general population in Denmark. "American Journal of Epidemiology," 1992135593-602.

32. Rodriguez-Pichardo, A. et al. Sexually transmitted diseases in homosexual males in Seville, Spain, "Geniourin Medicina," 1990 66;423-427.

33. AIDS Prognosis, Washington Times, 2/13/93, C1.



29 posted on 01/12/2004 12:16:40 PM PST by Happy2BMe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #30 Removed by Moderator

To: NYer
Re the 'Constitution' - the founders, IN THEIR WISDOM, gave us the ability to ammend it!
31 posted on 01/12/2004 12:31:50 PM PST by Eighth Square (All the people, all of the time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Amending the Constitution is conservative because it's Constitutional! Unlike judicial activism, which is ... not.
32 posted on 01/12/2004 12:32:47 PM PST by eastsider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
The result will be a federal judicial fiat forcing all fifty states to alter their marriage laws to accept gay marriage, which in turn will lead to additional fiats imposing gay adoption, gay child counselors, etc. on the states.

You make some really interesting points. I'm very interested in what those who disagree with you have to say in response.

33 posted on 01/12/2004 1:00:24 PM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Zack Nguyen
Because the Supreme Court, in its present make-up, would declare [a regular statute] unconstitutional.

There's another really good point.

34 posted on 01/12/2004 1:02:27 PM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
If only this were a state issue. The Equal Protection Clause makes this a Federal issue, sadly. That's why a Constitutional Ammendment is necessary.
35 posted on 01/12/2004 1:08:36 PM PST by truthandjustice1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76; puroresu; Zack Nguyen; BlackElk; highlander_UW; little jeremiah; Cathryn Crawford
I've read a lot on this subject but haven't seen support for the amendment made so well as I have on this thread.

As I see it, and I really do see the bigger picture of the homosexual agenda, we really need to be on the offensive in this regard. Playing defense, no matter how well we play, no matter how sound our arguments, no matter that we base our position on unrefutable facts, that doesn't matter because the other side doesn't play by any rules whatsoever. In fact they make it up as they go.

We need to play offense from now on, and that appears to mean we need to push for the constitutional amendment.

36 posted on 01/12/2004 1:17:08 PM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: NYer
Conserving our culture takes precedence over libertines being able to "celebrate" their perversions.
37 posted on 01/12/2004 1:20:23 PM PST by DLfromthedesert (What is the point of fighting in Iraq if we surrender to Vicente?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: puroresu
3) Massachusetts legalizes gay marriage, and the U.S. Supreme Court, via the full faith & credit clause, forces the other 49 states to legalize such marriages as well. This leads to further decisions over the next few years ordering the states to permit gay adoption, hire gay school counselors, challenging the tax exempt status of churches that don't perform gay marriages, and more.

I submit that #3 is not only most likely, it's a virual certainty.

So much for federalism.

You are absolutely correct, and any libertarians who don't see this must either not WANT to see it, or smoke too much dope. Or like the goal of the "gay" activists.

38 posted on 01/12/2004 5:00:22 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Comment #39 Removed by Moderator

Comment #40 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-40 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson