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

To: Astronaut
There is even more to it than that. We've seen recent lawsuits in Utah to re-institute polygamy on the basis of the USSC overturning the Texas case, and there is no legal way to prohibit multiple "wives/husbands" or even marriage to animals if the logic of Lawrence is invoked. Once that becomes clear, the numbers will go much higher than 60/40.
7 posted on 02/19/2004 10:08:08 AM PST by LS (CNN is the Amtrack of news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]


To: LS
If those folks in Utah push hard enough and loud enough (even if they don't really want it),

it will show that the slippery slope argument that leftists always poopoo is a clear reality.

Funny that in reality, the left wants absolutely NO standards of behavior, but when you ask them "what's next?" they always say that this issue, right here, is as far as they want to go... (until tomorrow).
10 posted on 02/19/2004 10:12:31 AM PST by MrB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

In my opinion, it's time for Republicans to keep a low profile on this issue:
When your enemy is in the process of self-destructing, you should leave him alone.

The SF mayor's stunt plus the upcoming Massachusetts gay marriages in May will help Bush get re-elected.

Furthermore, I suspect that gays won't be able to help themselves, and they might have a massive gay weddding (like the Moonies do) to coincide with the Democratic Convention in Boston.

Mark my words. The Loony Left is our friend (remember Dean?) These punks can alienate the middle-of-the-road voters very quickly.

I would like conservatives to push for a Republican supermajority in the US Senate (63+ seats), and I'd like to see 3 or 4 Jesse Helms to be elected this fall


12 posted on 02/19/2004 10:13:06 AM PST by george wythe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: LS; I still care; GiveEmDubya; Astronaut; Rutles4Ever; biblewonk
Is that why the Republicans not acted on this issue much until election time? To use as a glag burning like polarizing issue against the Dems? I think it is so because they use the term constitutional ammendment-in politco talk that means we are all for it to gain votes and will do nothing to push it through. Congress has the authority - under the same ruling from the Supreme Court that banned polygamy (Reynolds VS USA) to ban Gay marriage across America by majority vote. Why has the Republican dominated congress refused to do so? Cowardice? Stupidity? Or political opportunisim? I am tired of the yo-yo play on my nation's well being.
13 posted on 02/19/2004 10:13:09 AM PST by Destro (Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

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