Skip to comments.Santorum rips gay sex ruling
Posted on 06/28/2003 9:37:25 AM PDT by I_Love_My_Husband
click here to read article
In an interview with The Associated Press earlier this month, Santorum said he feared moral repercussions if the Supreme Court struck down Texas anti-sodomy law. Making homosexual sex legal, Santorum said, would mean you have the right to consensual sex within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You have the right to do anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I would argue yes, it does.
Whether its polygamy, whether its adultery, whether its sodomy, all of those things are antithetical to a healthy, stable, traditional family, he added. Santorum said the sexual abuse scandal rocking the Roman Catholic Church was spurred by tolerance of homosexuality among adults. In areas where you have that as an accepted lifestyle, dont be surprised that you get more of it.
The Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation is pleased with the Supreme Courts decision.
Of course they are, but golly gee, what's everyone getting so hysterical about?
"This is ONLY about what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms!"
"Do YOU really think the gov't has a right to be in our bedrooms/lock people up for what they do in their own private home?"
"Its a SILLY law anyways, what difference could it possible make?!?"
" Santorum obviously was wrong/made an ass of himself/mis spoke/shoulda kept his big mouth shut/was imprudent/embarrassed us etc. "
NEWSLINE FOLKS: SANTORUM WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG! And those who excoriated him are fools.
Star Tribune ^ | June 27, 2003 | Michelangelo Signorile
One of the most exciting and pivotal events in years for the gay rights movement in the United States just occurred -- in another country. Canada, soon expected to legalize same-sex marriage, is hardly the first nation to recognize gay and lesbian unions. But, for Americans, the decision is monumental because Canada is in our own back yard. It remains to be seen whether such marriages would be legally recognized here, and litigation will likely ensue for years to come. But the cultural impact from Canada's action will release a blast a hundred times stronger than any Arctic air mass...
Sodomy ruling prompts fears and cheers (Boy Scout and marriage questions?) ^
Posted by RonF
On 06/27/2003 11:23 AM EDT with 28 comments
The Philadelphia Daily News ^ | 6/26/03 | William Bunch
FIRST COMES LOVE, then comes marriage? On a day when the U.S. Supreme Court issued a historic ruling ending the last remaining laws against gay sex, conservative activists led by Justice Antonin Scalia had already started waging the next war - the battle over gay marriage. ... Scalia warned that although the six judges in the majority insisted their ruling has no impact on allowing gay marriages, "Don't you believe it." "Today's opinion dismantles the structure of constitutional law that has permitted a distinction to be made between heterosexual and homosexual unions," he insisted. Polls consistently show that while most...
Freepers SUPPORT the Defense of Marriage Amendment NOW! ^
Posted by ohiopyle
On 06/27/2003 5:54 AM EDT with 14 comments
U.S. House of Represenatives ^
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. (Introduced in House) HJ 56 IH 108th CONGRESS 1st Session H. J. RES. 56 Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES May 21, 2003 Mrs. MUSGRAVE (for herself, Mr. HALL, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS of Virginia, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary JOINT RESOLUTION Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to marriage. Resolved by...
Homosexuals Push for Same-Sex Marriage After Sodomy Ruling ^
Posted by kattracks
On 06/27/2003 5:19 AM EDT with 216 comments
CNSNews.com ^ | 6/27/03 | Robert B. Bluey
(CNSNews.com) - Hours after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas sodomy statute, homosexual activists proclaimed their next target would be to overturn a host of laws they view as discriminatory, including those that limit marriage to opposite-sex couples. Even before the court's 6-3 ruling extended privacy rights to homosexuals, conservatives and pro-family advocates warned that such a decision would lead to an erosion of traditional values. Now, they said, it is even more important to fight back. "This is a major wake-up call," said the Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman of the Traditional Values Coalition. "This is a...
High Court's Colorful Dissenter Predicts Ruling Will Lead To Gay Marriage Laws ^
Posted by Brian S
On 06/26/2003 7:36 PM EDT with 44 comments
Associated Press ^ | 06-26-03
By ANNE GEARAN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- Justice Antonin Scalia, during the Supreme Court's final session of the term Thursday, accused his colleagues of inviting gay marriage in a ruling he said "coos'' over a feel-good, gay rights agenda. "The court has taken sides in the culture war, departing from its role of assuring, as neutral observer, that the democratic rules of engagement are observed,'' Scalia said. Scalia read from a dissenting opinion that, at 21 pages, was longer than the court majority's 18-page ruling striking down a Texas ban on gay sex. There were murmurs from some... THE LAW OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY ^
Posted by Coleus
On 06/26/2003 5:31 PM EDT with 7 comments
Harvard Law Review ^ | 05.12.03
DEVELOPMENTS - BOOKPROOFS 05/12/03 10:03 AMDEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAWTHE LAW OF MARRIAGE AND FAMILY"Great families of yesterday we show,And lords whose parents were the Lord knows who."DANIEL DEFOE, THE TRUE-BORN ENGLISHMANpt. 1, l. 374 (1701)."[G]roups that have historically been the target of discrimination cannote expected to wait patiently for the protection of their human dignity and equal rights while governments move toward reform one stepat a time."Vriend v. Alberta,  1 S.C.R. 493, 559 (Can.) (Iacobucci, J.)."The possibility of divorce renders both marriage partners stricter in their observance of the duties they owe to each other."DENIS DIDEROT, Observations on...
Gay Marriage Said To Be Approaching Like Tidal Wave ^
Posted by I_Love_My_Husband
On 06/26/2003 4:17 PM EDT with 110 comments
thelouisvillechannel.com ^ | 6/24/03
Gay Marriage Said To Be Approaching Like Tidal WaveGroup Wants Amendment To Define Marriage Between Man, WomanPOSTED: 12:08 p.m. EDT June 24, 2003WASHINGTON -- Alliance for Marriage President Matt Daniels says American culture is about to be hit by the equivalent of a tidal wave. That's how Daniels describes the legalization of gay marriage, which is under way in Canada and could soon be mandated by U.S. courts as well. SURVEY Should the United States recognize same-sex marriages performed in Canada? No, marriages should only be between a man and a woman.Yes, but only because we generally accept other marriages...
Ruling may impact sex laws, sets stage for marriage fight ^
Posted by Dog Gone
On 06/26/2003 3:44 PM EDT with 45 comments
Washington Blade ^ | June 26, 2003 | CHRIS CRAIN
In sweeping language, the Supreme Court struck down the Texas sodomy law, and with it similar laws in 12 other states, as violating gay Americans' right to due process, but the debate among the justices was far broader, and in many ways set the stage for the court to address the issue of marriage, the next looming battle in the "culture wars," in Justice Antonin Scalia's parlance. Even on the issue of sodomy laws, the justices were expansive in their reasoning. The Supreme Court typically decides only the question before it, but the majority opinion in Lawrence vs. Texas went...
Cook County voting for Homosexual Marriage ^
Posted by chicagolady
On 06/26/2003 8:02 AM EDT with 35 comments
Cook County Commitioners | 062603 | chicagolady
Ok folks we do need your help! Cook County Human Relations Board needs to hear from you to say NO to making Homosexual Marriage Legal. I just had a thought. Lawyers are probably pushing FOR this so it is job security. More divorce through the court system, more jobs for lawyers. Anyway I am told the facts are that there are less than 2% Homosexuals as the population. Why should laws be changed for such a minority. Please HELP US OUT and call those who want to pass it and tell them NO! If they ask you where you are...
Same-sex marriage issue fuels debate in NJ ^
Posted by Coleus
On 06/25/2003 9:37 PM EDT with 37 comments
North Jersey Media Group ^ | 06.25.03
Same-sex marriage issue fuels debate Wednesday, June 25, 2003 By WHITNEY KVASAGER,HERALD NEWS PATERSON - Seven gay and lesbian couples are waiting to know if they can continue their lawsuit that seeks to broaden the state's definition of marriage. On Friday, a judge may give her opinion.On Tuesday night, people crowded into a community forum to give theirs.The forum, sponsored by the Herald News at the Passaic County Community College theater, began with a panel discussion between representatives for and against same-sex marriage. Panel members came from Lambda Legal, Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, the New Jersey...
Don't legalize gay marriage ^
Posted by JohnHuang2
On 06/25/2003 1:53 AM EDT with 6 comments
SANTORUM WAS RIGHT ALL ALONG!
And those who excoriated him are fools.
I'd like to see him hold a seminar for RINOs.
I am near San Francisco, and on TV yesterday, it showed a bunch of digusting people, and they came right out and said, their next objective, is to legalize same sex marriages. It sure did not take long did it?
I'd like to see him hold a seminar for FREEPERS. They need to learn what conservatism is.
I'd like to see him hold a seminar for FREEPERS. They need to learn what conservatism is.
I didn't realize one could simultaneously engage in sodomy AND have "dignity"(?) Seems a bit mutually exclusive to me!
Maybe next week the Supreme Court will preserve the dignity of ex-presidents who are best known for masturbating into the corner sink on company time?
I think he is correct. What he didn't say was that if the moralists had not tried to regulate private behavior, there would not be a SC decision that will affect the public institution of marriage.
Santorum is right. This is going to open the floodgates for all sorts of stuff we've been trying to keep under control, like prostitution and pedophelia.
I fear the judgement of God on our nation.
Weep a libertarian crocodile tear for them on my behalf, ok Cogburn?
It's a gay new world, brought to you by the liberal-libertarian alliance.
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.