Northern Assault Threatens Marriage (MUST READ)

The Oklahoman ^ | June 30, 2003 | Oklahoman Editorial

[PhiKapMom]

From this editorial we had better be prepared for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be challenged in the courts and eventually ending up at the SCOTUS.

[MEG33]

Marriage is for one man and one woman.

[PhiKapMom]

This was in my paper this morning as their lead editorial.
I didn't realize until reading this that the DOMA was in trouble with lawsuits. Now that we know how the SCOTUS is ruling, we need a coordinated effort by all the groups.

Do either of you know if Focus on the Family has become involved?

[PhiKapMom]

I couldn't agree more and glad to see Senator Frist last night said he would be for a constitutional amendment stating that fact.

This has the makings of turning into one nasty campaign with this issue key!

Seems Senator Schumer was at the Gay Pride in NY over the weekend praising this SCOTUS decision and shouting out for the Gay Pride parade participants!

Disgusting!

[Baseballguy]

Marriage is for one man and one woman.

I was wondering in the day of the old testament it was more like one man and 8 women. That sounds like pleasure and pain. I heard that women together get thier cycles at the same time.

ARGH!!!!!

[PhiKapMom]

Am using the Bush-Cheney '04 ping list because it is the only one I have. This issue is very important and most likely will end up a part of the campaign in 2004 (you can take that to the bank).

IMO there will be an all out assault on President Bush from the Gay community and their lapdogs in the Liberal wing of the Clinton DemocRAT Party because of the upcoming SCOTUS appointments.

We cannot lose this election and must pick up Senate seats to begin to turn back the judicial activism of the liberal Courts today.

Looking for suggestions on ping lists -- need to know if you object to this list being used for articles on the assault on DOMA by the gay and lesbian community for their agenda of making Gay Marriage legal which is fast becoming a hot topic for the 2004 elections. If so, then I will start a new list!

Thanks!

[Aeronaut]

...need to know if you object to this list being used for articles on the assault on DOMA by the gay and lesbian community for their agenda of making Gay Marriage legal...

No objection here. This is way too important.

[isthisnickcool]

I heard that women together get thier cycles at the same time.

[PhiKapMom]

Thanks! That's what I thought too!

Believe this issue is going to get really nasty in the election with the retirements of SCOTUS looming and the liberals and their friends in the media already in attack form.

[Kenny Bunk]

Dear Mom,

Please do not take this CANADIAN law out of context. It was merely intended as a protective measure to keep valuable sled dogs from harmful and demoralizing abuse.

Furthermore, I do not expect it to slow down Canada's major exports to the US: truculent hockey players, sheet-rockers, and the odd Islamic terrorist.

[PhiKapMom]

LOL!!!!!!!!!!! That puts things in perspective!

[b4its2late]

It's going to be tested sooner than we think.

I was watching CBS news last night (at least I think it was CBS) and saw two men that were married in Canada and currently living there. One is an American citizen and the other is an Irish citizen. The Irish guy said he always wanted to become an American citizen, so since he's married to an American man, he wants to get his citizenship here due to marriage. They are planning on moving here and challenging the right to be recognized as married and as a citizen of the US.

[dljordan]

Looks like a herd picture from Boulder, Colorado.

[Fishrrman]

PhiKapMom wrote:
From this editorial we had better be prepared for the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be challenged in the courts and eventually ending up at the SCOTUS

And end up there it will. Considering the current behavior of the Court, the outcome will be anybody's guess. _My_ guess is that there is a relatively strong -- not guaranteed, but "strong", nonetheless -- possibility that our side could lose.

With Vermont, and soon Massachusetts, we will have lost "two for two". I predict that if gay marriage comes before the New Jersey Supreme Court (one of the most liberal in the nation), that we will lose there as well. That will make it three for three.

Gay marriage is taking exactly the same "trek towards legitimization" that _abortion_ took before the Roe v. Wade decision. This is no mistake -- it is intentional and well-planned.

The routine works like this:
1. Gain a "foothold" for your argument by getting your cause "legitimized" in a few states (even though the majority of the remainder of those states still outlaw it).
2. Build a measure of public opinion supporting your issue (again, the majority of public opinion still against you notwithstanding).
3. Get your issue before the Supreme Court, and persuade them to "cross the line" between adjudicating and law-writing. This might be deemed the "penumbra of rights" tactic.

It worked with Roe. And -- particularly considering the Court's "Sodomy ruling" only a few days ago -- has a very good chance of working again with gay marriage. The "legal groundwork" is already there. All that is necessary is to coax the Justices to "reach" just a bit further in their reasoning.

For this reason, the outcome of a Supreme Court challenge to the Defense of Marriage act cannot be guaranteed. Presuming that our view of "traditional marriage" will survive a Supreme Court challenge carries great risk.

For that reason, it should not be allowed to happen. It _can_ be prevented, but we must act soon.

And the ONLY way to prevent such an eventual Supreme Court challenge, with its uncertain outcome, is to do an "end run" around the courts. Of course, this will require a United States Constitutional Amendment.

My proposed amendment to the United States Constitution:
============
"The United States, and the Several States, recognize that the legal and moral contract of marriage may be established only between one man and one woman. Neither the United States, nor the Several States, will sanction nor recognize any form of marriage other than that entered into by one man and one woman."
============

This is what it will take -- and can be the ONLY possible solution -- to stop the "gay marriage" movement in its tracks. Nothing else will work. Let me repeat that for you lunkheads: NOTHING ELSE WILL WORK. If you really want to "stop them", this is how you will have to do it.

From time to time, I have encountered individuals on this board who counter my thoughts with the supposition, "this isn't a matter for the Constitution" (or the courts). Your point is well taken, from a strictly intellectual viewpoint, but in the end you will lose if this is the only argumentative weapon you choose with which to do battle against the other side. THEY will use ALL weapons at their disposal in order to achieve their goal, and WILL NOT STOP FIGHTING until they have achieved that goal.

Like the obstructive Democrats of the Senate who are fillibustering the nomination of federal judges, they realize that our side may lack the "will" to take decisive and final action to stop their onslaught. In the case of the Senate, our side could quickly and easily end the fillibusters and force judicial nominations to the floor by use of the so-called "nuclear option" -- but they're _afraid_. Afraid of exactly _what_, only G-d knows.

And so it follows that we are "afraid" to press on -- and fight hard -- for the only "nuclear option" that will stop the gay marriage juggernaut. In our hearts, we know what must be done.

But will we do it?

Cheers!
- John

[Bigg Red]

Those in Congress who've defended marriage in the past need to gird for the next battle, which is just around the bend.

&&&

Yes, they do. And the battle promises to be ferocious.

[Bigg Red]

...need to know if you object to this list being used for articles on the assault on DOMA..

**
No, I do not object. Thank you for including me. DOMA is important because marriage and the family form the cornerstone of our civilization.

[ewing]

I think the Massachusetts case will end up on the SCOTUS first..

[Bigg Red]

Your well-articulated description of their tactics is right on the money. And your scary prediction rings true. God help us!

[Pippin]

Keep om pinging me, I need to know what we're up against!

[BOBTHENAILER]

Thanks for the Ping to this vital matter. Marriage means just what it says.

Not meant for the aberrant to legitimize their behavior in an effort to advance their cause, which by their very nature means recruitment.