Americans must preserve institution of marriage (Sen. Rick Santorum)

USAToday ^ | Rick Santorum

[bedolido]

The majority of Supreme Court justices may not be willing to admit it, but everyone else seems eager to acknowledge that the greatest near-term consequence of the Lawrence v. Texas anti-sodomy ruling could be the legalization of homosexual marriage. Although the court's majority opinion attempts to distance the ruling from the marriage debate, the dissenting justices say, "Do not believe it." Major Web sites such as America Online's home page, as well as newspapers and TV commentators, have signaled that the decision puts the gay-marriage debate in high gear. The Washington Post's front page trumpeted, "A debate on marriage, and more, now looms." And Newsweek's July 7 cover asks: "Is Gay Marriage Next?"

[mewzilla]

Tell it to Kerry Kennedy Cuomo and her polo-playing pal.

[Support Free Republic]

Strong Conservative Forums Help Prevent Candidates Like This From Winning Elections
	Finish Strong. Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[anniegetyourgun]

The Senator says "see, I told you so."

[anniegetyourgun]

No doubt that the 'institution' has been failing. He's not talking about that. He's talking about the legal definition, upon which largess and benefits are determined. Some of us would like to keep things the way they are because heterosexual marriage is better social policy than anarchy based on the politics of sexual behavior.

[AD from SpringBay]

Yeah! It always makes sense that when something is weak to weaken it further. Right on man! Let the sodomites marry, adopt children and do whatever. It's all relative! Vote Hillary.

[Notwithstanding]

Anal Log Man

[Tribune7]

Santorum is the best senator.

[Tribune7]

Hmmm, yep, must be the fault of the homos!

I missed that in the article. Where is it?

[Notwithstanding]

Sorry, but the state has - by recgonizing marriages and affording special treatment because of marriages - always been in the bedroom.

For millennia governments have recognized the contributions married families make to society and the problems non-married pretend families cause in society.

If you wish to pretend that these pretend families don't cause problems in society then you are free to do so - and stand in the minority, and against logic and evidence.

[Kevin Curry]

It started going to hell with the advent of widespread sexual permissiveness, promiscuity, and the loosening of moral strictures, especially in the 1960s, that had helped to safeguard marriage before. Liberal SCOTUS "progressive" superlegislating in cases such as Griswold and Roe v. Wade were acids that greatly accelerated the destruction. The Lawrence decsion is just another bucketful of acid thrown on the institution of marriage.

The gay rights movement has been at the forefront of this destruction of traditional values from the very start. So, yes, gay activism must share responsibility for what has happened.

Legitimizing so-called "gay marriage" will merely be the coup de grace as it is substitutes the most foul and outrageous lie of all for traditional moral truth: that homsexual relationships are just as moral and beneficial to society as traditional mom and dad families are.

Only liberals and libertarians are too dense or vile to understand or accept that truth. Which are you?

[bedolido]

Anal Log Man

lol. A bit rough man!

Didn't you forget your FMCDH (or whatever you add about your cold-dead-hands)

[Kevin Curry]

Keep the government out of my wallet, my bedroom, and my gun cabinet.

SCOTUS will keep them out of the middle one (not that they were ever really there to begin with). However, your stupidity, hubris, and moral denseness will merely ensure that the same SCOTUS will allow government into your wallet (AIDS research etc) and gun cabinet ("progressive" European ideas about guns).

You have chosen to be enslaved because you refuse to make important moral distinctions and stand up for them. May your rot in the vile hell you have created for yourself.

[Notwithstanding]

But what if the laws of the community provide for no buggering?

What if the laws of the community provide that the age of consent for sex is 12?

[bedolido]

two butt-jockies!!! rump-rangers!!!

lol... I'M TRYING TO WORK HERE!!! LMAO. STOP!