Posted on 01/26/2015 7:28:41 AM PST by C19fan
The timing couldn’t have been more perfect.
Every year in the week surrounding the Jan. 22 anniversary of Roe v. Wade, abortion foes organize marches and rallies to proclaim their opposition to the decision, which in 1973 declared the procedure a constitutional right.
The Supreme Court guaranteed that the rhetoric surrounding the anniversary would be especially heated this year when on the Friday of the previous week it granted cert in four cases that could produce a majority opinion declaring a constitutional right to same-sex marriage.
Right on cue, social conservatives responded by linking any such declaration to Roe and its rancorous aftermath. No, the right asserted, a Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage will not “settle” the issue. On the contrary, it will recapitulate the powerful and polarizing reaction to the landmark abortion-rights decision, galvanizing a grassroots movement of opposition to the ruling that could eventually reverse it.
Sorry, but this is nonsense.
(Excerpt) Read more at theweek.com ...
Easy there...
You don’t just marry your duck....
First you have to visit a therapist to find out if you self-identify as a duck, then you need to take an inventory of all the micro-aggression you have endured due to you duckieness, run numerous media campaigns about duck-love... and that’s just the opening moves. The visible ones at least, I haven’t even got into the networking and background discussions about how talking about ducks can serve the greater good (read liberalism)
Thanks! And I agree. The governance is the crux of it and LGBT have shown they intend to use government to institutionalize their agenda.
I thought John Roberts`s was a good Christian man when he was first picked??? He may be supporting gay marriage now.
This is what I’ve been saying all along, and here’s where nullification and state’s rights would really make a difference. Forget nullification of “gay marriage.” That’s closing the barn door after the horse is gone. Conservative states should nullify Lawrence.
They say you can beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride. Even if higher courts ultimately overturn the convictions, truly conservative states should be passing their own laws and enforcing them to keep this filth where it belongs - underground or in prison.
Think fags would live in a state where they could be arrested for so-called “consensual sex?” Where they would be arrested, jailed and imprisoned until such time as the appeal was heard, and Federal marshals came to let them out?
Sure, the convictions won’t stand up. So? States should enforce their own community standards, and if the Feds interfere, let it be clear that it’s the Feds who are permitting this filth in public, and the States will continue to enforce their own laws.
What’s the downside?
In reality—that is, measured by the actual effect on people who divorce, their friends, their relatives, their neighbors, their employers . . . and on subsequent generations—is that it continues to be a big deal, a disaster, in fact, and always will be. It's true that people once were aware of this, and then lost their awareness of the consequences. But my sense is that many more people are now realizing the danger of divorce to society, as statistics and people's personal experience have been piling up. Charles Murray's book, Coming Apart, is brilliant in showing this.
Murray would freak out at this suggestion: I think it's crucial now, because of the threats to freedom, virtue, and survival posed by the organized-sodomy lobby, to publicize the catastrophic physical and social harms caused by sodomy. It's important to realize that people are drawn into it because of their previous emotional damage, and it destroys them.
There's a terrific, beautiful, one-hour movie that everyone should see. If you start watching it, you will stay to the end—even if the "ick" factor of watching something about homosexuals is strong in you, as it is in me. It's brilliant. It's called Desire of the the Everlasting Hills (no, it isn't dirty), and it's a free download here.
Afterwards they will demand full access to school kids and the GOPe will roll over then too
I guess all those Christian business people and others being put out of work aren’t “being hurt”?
Every single clause of the stated purposes of the U.S. Constitution is laid waste by abortion and pretend sodomite marriage.
It’s not about gay marriage. The gays want to force their lifestyle on the public and make them celebrate their perversion as healthy and normal.
THIS.
Some around here have brought up the possibility of a new party as an alternative to the non-conservative Republican party.
Forcing society to recognize homosexual marriage would be the nail in the coffin. Many will no longer be looking for a new party but a new nation altogether.
Such a ruling will be an act of provocation tantamount to an act of war, starting Revolution 2.
The disinformation campaign starts from the Left and their sympathizers. So, they must be worried it will be the new Roe v. Wade!
or the voting majority think it is
That is obviously untrue: millions said no only to have the black robed fascists overturn their votes.
The voting majority chose that ‘gay marriage’ is possible in four states. Marriage amendments lost in at least two states. And there are states whose marriage amendments only passed in the low 50% ranges a decade ago and would be likely be repealable by popular referendum eventually if not now. Not that they have to, because our black robed masters cut out the middle men.
In any case my point was that the state in the modern era only has those ways to define marriage for itself. 50-40 years ago they started to give us no-fault divorce, now ‘gay marriage.’
FReegards
That’s an understatement, this adds damage on top of the damage of illegitimate children, which is rampant in society, in addition to the unwed single parents. It’s not far-fetched that a great deal of Americans on welfare are currently unwed parents. Add the legalization of taking down religious freedom, and it will be a mess.
Divorce is a problem, they don’t make it appear to be so, or report it a whole lot on the news, but there are some admissions about what divorce has, especially in negative effects on children.
http://www.children-and-divorce.com/children-divorce-statistics.html
Man woman marriage ammendment in nc passed in 2013 60-40, nearly.
Many ammendments were passed in the last few years by large majorities, even California’s until overturned by the whim of a court.
Homosexual marriage is not a choice of the people. It is being imposed ON the people.In states like New York it was not put to any vote. It was simply imposed by the legislature.
I do not hold out much hope that the scotus will support the states whose ammendments have been overturned...but I pray they read the plain words of the constitution. And recall the limits on their power.
In 2012 NC voted their amendment in by 61%, and was considered a great victory by many. But every state around NC except VA and FL passed theirs in the mid-high 70% ranges 6+ years before. NC’s 61% ties the CA prop. 22 marriage ballot of 2000. It was struck down by the CA supreme court. So 2012 NC was around 12 years behind CA on ‘gay marriage’—which probably would have been called crazy if someone predicted that in 2000. In 2008, CA passed prop. 8 by 52%, losing 9% on the issue in 8 years.
“I pray they read the plain words of the constitution. And recall the limits on their power.”
Same here.
Freegards
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.