Push to ban gay marriage flagging in Iowa

FOX News ^ | July 5 2012 | Associated Press

[scottjewell]

WashingtonSource, I hope you and 2111USMC are right. Maybe this is media hype, put out there on purpose to make those who oppose gay marriage feel like giving up. By presenting it as “a losing issue for conservatives” they may be hoping to get the GOP to go totally pro-same sex marriage. Yes, North Carolina told quite a different tale. Time will tell...

[GrannyK]

IL Att. Gen. is not going to defend the constitution which says marriage is between man and woman in a lawsuit that is pending. It was announced that a couple of attorneys have ask permission to defend & they will be allowed to do so. Now tell me why we even have Lisa Madigan on the payroll?

Cook County State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez and Attorney General Lisa Madigan refused to defend it.

http://effinghamdailynews.com/local/x1501699827/Effingham-County-clerk-gets-OK-to-defend-gay-marriage-ban

[scottjewell]

Yes, the DA and state’s attorney thought they were doing some heroic and noble thing by not upholding the law of the state. I believe it is 2 county clerks backed by an attorney who contested this, and received permission to uphold the law. Time will tell where this all lands.

[SamuraiScot]

Conservative lawmakers are watching public opinion move away from them on the gay marriage issue

What does public opinion matter? It has never mattered to the sodomy-promoters. What's wrong (and disgusting and improbable) is wrong. This is a matter of self-defense for us as a society and as individuals with children and grandchildren. Banish it and destroy those who try to spread it—whatever way works.

[fr_freak]

"forcing the courts and society as a whole to recognize your sodomy based relationship and give you particular rights due to it is not a “personal freedom.” "

Unfortunately Libertarians do not view it this way, and would legalize drugs and many vices.

Regardless of how you feel about these issues one way or the other, the push for forced acceptance of homosexuality and the legalization of drugs are two entirely separate things, in two entirely different categories, and should not be mixed together.

For example, no one is trying to outlaw homosexual acts - not even the most socially conservative far "right wing" religious people are doing that. They are merely trying to resist the forced acceptance of those acts by the government. Everyone should understand by now that the push for gay marriage is not for "equality", but so that no business and no organization, including churches, can legally disapprove of homosexual behavior. Everyone, by law, will be forced to accept it as "normal".

With drugs, however, it is the very act of personal use of drugs that people want to be kept illegal, so that a guy sitting in his own house still can't legally fire up a joint before he goes to bed. That is an attempt to outlaw a specific behavior.

It may seem like a trifling difference between the two, but it is actually a fundamental difference which says what role we believe is appropriate for government. In the first case, it is the government trying to force a behavior (acceptance of homosexuality), and in the second, it is government trying to forbid a behavior (illegal drug use).

The distinction is also important because pro-gay people like to deliberately confuse the gay marriage issue by saying that "people should be allowed to love whomever they want" when, in reality, people have been able to love whomever they want since the dawn of time, and even homos can love who they want even without gay marriage, but the pro-gay people want to sucker others into thinking that if gay marriage isn't legalized, homos will be thrown in jail for having gay sex, or looking at each other longingly across a table.

[newgeezer]

[Romans 1:24-32]

Thanks. You beat me to it. :)

[heye2monn]

Thanks. It is appalling, so many of our supposedly conservative youth growing up unchurched and amoral.