[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

There are plenty of states whose citizens do not capitulate to this evil. Even the citizens of California voted overwhelmingly to protect the Biblical definition of marriage.

The problem is the communist judges who overturn it.

The other states like NY are similarly led by tyrants.

The next step for the homos is to take this to the Federal level and force those states that do not recognize queer marriage to reciprocate, that is, recognize the queer marriages from other states. Their argument will be that it is discriminatory for there not to be “equality” across the states.

And remember, folks, one of the arguments AGAINST queer/homosexual/same-sex marriage is that it is not fair that homosexuals have EXTRA rights.

Heterosexuals abide by the law that we cannot marry someone of our own sex. Homosexuals have those same limitations. AND homosexuals are as free as heterosexuals to marry anyone they want, provided that other person meets the same requirements that heterosexuals are limited to (opposite sex, age requirements, bloodline requirements, not currently married).

But the homosexuals want the EXTRA right of being able to marry someone of the same sex.

Thus, homosexuals want SPECIAL RIGHTS, not EQUAL RIGHTS.

[Ransomed]

“Even the citizens of California voted overwhelmingly to protect the Biblical definition of marriage.”

If you are talking about prop. 8, it was passed by a little over 52% in 2008. I would expect NY to be very close as well in any sort of general vote on the subject.

It isn’t really about rights or marriage in my opinion, although you are correct that that is the argument they use. It is simply about statists and homosexualists being able to eventually punish those who won’t accept their ever evolving definition of marriage.

Freegards

[Jim Noble]

Even the citizens of California voted overwhelmingly to protect the Biblical definition of marriage

They outlawed divorce?

[Conscience of a Conservative]

One small point - by your logic, same-sex “marriage” is not a special right for homosexuals. Yes, it is the case that homosexuals are free to marry, just like heterosexuals, as long as their spouse meets the required criteria (including, of course, that the spouse is of the opposite sex). But, if same-sex “marriage” is allowed, heterosexuals will be just as free as homosexuals to “marry” someone of the same sex.

I’m not arguing in favor or same-sex “marriage,” merely pointing out that it would not give homosexuals any more rights than heterosexuals.