Replies

Rehnquist was correct when he wrote that the Court's majority had "entered the culture wars"... where the Court has no business meddling. Those 6 justices have effectively used the bench to make social commentary - and the usual "unintended consequences" are inevitable.

The 10th Amendment has again been spat upon. The debates and deliberations of state legislatures to write statutes have been rendered null, void and meaningless.
Despite the majority's protests, they have given the nod to virtually any deviant, dangerous, harmful behavior - with the only requirement being that such acts must occur behind closed doors.

The "slippery slope" is real...and it looks like we're on our way down it.

There are two questions for conservatives with regard to homosexuality. 1) Is a homosexual a human being? 2) Does the practice help society, and this question should probably be interpreted narrowly from the perspective of reproduction.

1) Do conservatives believe homosexuals are not human? If we did, we would determine that someone who intentionally kills a homosexual had not committed murder. I don't think even the most extreme of conservatives would take this position.

2) Homosexuals are not going to reproduce biologically. Period. In the past, this mattered a great deal and society, which needed to grow, would oppose it on those grounds. Times have changed, but not all that much. We still have tax deductions for kids. We, as a society, still encourage growth to that degree. The sadness of parents whose child "comes out" has nuances. Some of it is not selfless. Some of it mourns for their own future joy of grandkids. And some mourns for the unhappiness they feel their own child will endure.

So. We, as conservatives, would do well to keep in mind that there are two ends to this spectrum. Our distaste is thoroughly constrained by item 1 above. Item 2 merely guides where on the shades-of-gray spectrum our position should be.