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

Skip to comments.

BLAME THE GOP FOR PRO-SODOMY COURT DECISION
The Heustis Update ^ | June 27, AD 2003 | Reed R. Heustis, Jr.

Posted on 06/29/2003 11:26:04 AM PDT by Polycarp

BLAME THE GOP FOR PRO-SODOMY COURT DECISION By: Reed R. Heustis, Jr. June 27, AD 2003

With one stroke of the pen, [homosexuality] has triumphed at the Supreme Court.

And guess what?

Republican-appointed Justices are to blame.

With a convincing 6-3 decision in Lawrence v. Texas, the United States Supreme Court on June 26 overturned a 1986 case, Bowers v. Hardwick, which had upheld the legitimacy of an anti-sodomy law. Sodomites and perverts all across America are hailing the Lawrence decision as the biggest gay rights victory in our nation's history.

Mitchell Katine, the openly gay attorney representing John Lawrence and Tyron Garner, the men whose arrest in 1998 led to the decision, proclaimed, "this is a day of independence."

Whereas homosexual deviancy has long been celebrated in the media and on our university campuses over the last two decades, the Johnny-come-lately Supreme Court now joins the orgy. As dissenting Justice Antonin Scalia correctly stated, "The court has taken sides in the culture war...."

How could this have happened?

Weren't Republicans supposed to be the champions of traditional values?

Weren't Republicans supposed to be the stalwart defenders of our nation's Christian heritage?

Seriously, just think:

Every four years without fail, the Republican Party instructs Christians to elect Republicans to office so that we can thwart the left wing agenda of the Democratic Party.

Every four years without fail, the Republican Establishment warns its rank and file never to vote for a third party candidate, lest we elect a Democrat by default by "giving him the election".

Every four years without fail, Christians are told that third party candidates cannot win, and that a vote for a third party candidate is somehow a vote for the Democrat.

Every four years without fail, Christians are bamboozled into believing that their beloved Republican Party will restore this nation to its Christian heritage.

Every four years without fail, we are told that only a Republican can appoint a conservative Justice to the high bench so that liberalism can be stopped cold.

Without fail.

Christians, wake up!

It is the Republican Party that is responsible for moronic decisions such as Lawrence. Quit blaming the liberals and the Democrats. Blame the GOP!

Out of the six Justices that formed the horrifying 6-3 Lawrence majority, four were appointed by Republicans! Four!

Justice John Paul Stevens was nominated by President Gerald Ford - a Republican.

Justices Sandra Day O'Connor and Anthony Kennedy were nominated by President Ronald Reagan - a Republican.

Justice David Souter was nominated by President George H.W. Bush - a Republican.

Two-thirds of the majority opinion were Republican-appointed!

"I believe this needs to be trumpeted," says Tim Farness, 1st District Representative of the Constitution Party of Wisconsin.

Indeed it does.

A 4-2 majority of the six Justices forming the Lawrence decision was Republican-appointed.

Republican President George W. Bush intends to run for a second term in 2004. Don't be too surprised when we start hearing the same-old song and dance all over again: "Elect Republicans so that we can defeat the Democratic agenda."

Mr. President: the Republican Party is the Democratic agenda.

© AD 2003 The Heustis Update, accessible on the web at www.ReedHeustis.com. All Rights Reserved.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; Extended News
KEYWORDS: activistcourt; activistsupremecourt; ageofconsentlaws; bigomylaws; catholiclist; consentingadults; consentingteens; downorupanyorifice; downourthroats; druglaws; homosexualagenda; houston; incestlaws; lawrencevtexas; marriagelaws; pc; politicallycorrect; polygomylaws; privacylaws; prostitutionlaws; protectedclass; republicans; rinos; samesexdisorder; sexlaws; sodomylaws; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560561-564 last
To: Kudsman
Thank you so much for the additional explanation and especially for your testimony! Hugs!!!
561 posted on 07/03/2003 8:16:24 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
"...who want the sex police busting down bedroom doors of adults..."

No "busted down doors" in the case under discussion. The door was open and the police were there legally in response to a criminal complaint. The "plain sight" doctrine resulted in the arrests.

562 posted on 07/04/2003 11:18:26 PM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: Bonaparte
Jorge"...who want the sex police busting down bedroom doors of adults..."

No "busted down doors" in the case under discussion. The door was open and the police were there legally in response to a criminal complaint. The "plain sight" doctrine resulted in the arrests.

It turned out to be phoney and fabricated "criminal complaint".
You want to live in a world where busy-body neighbors can make up any lie they want to have the police enter your house and see what you're doing in your bedroom with whom?

Incredible!

And so what if the door was unlocked meaning there were no "busted down doors"???

Are you saying we now need to lock and barricade our houses to stop sex police sent by lying neighbors?
What is your point?

563 posted on 07/05/2003 8:36:37 PM PDT by Jorge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 562 | View Replies]

To: Jorge
My points are several.

    a) The police were responding to a serious complaint, as they must do -- even though the complaint later turned out to be bogus, as they sometimes are.

    b) The police entered the premises legally and with probable cause -- no misbehavior of any kind on the part of the police.

    c) While on the premises, the police viewed a crime in progress. The court-tested "plain sight" doctrine permitted them to make the arrest.

Those are my points, Jorge. The police don't decide what the law is going to be. Legislators do that. The police are paid only to enforce those laws that are on the books, which is what they did in this case.

Nobody's door was busted in by rogue cops on some crusade against homosexuals.

564 posted on 07/06/2003 1:23:27 AM PDT by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 563 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 501-520521-540541-560561-564 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