Posted on 04/28/2015 3:33:45 PM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
;’)
The following fro mthat article says basically what I’ve just been saying- Gay people are trying to get homosexuality delisted as immoral, and this is the whole crux of their attack on marriage-
“Today’s opinion is the product of a Court, which is the product of a law-profession culture, that has largely signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda, by which I mean the agenda promoted by some homosexual activists directed at eliminating the moral opprobrium that has traditionally attached to homosexual conduct.”
The liberals o nthe court are arguing, apparently the following
[[sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring,” ante, at 6; what justification could there possibly be for denying the benefits of marriage to homosexual couples exercising “[t]he liberty protected by the Constitution,”]]
IF that is their argument, then you MUST allow ALL DEVIANT forms of sexual gratification legal status
The liberals o nthe court go on to declare
[[Surely not the encouragement of procreation, since the sterile and the elderly are allowed to marry. ]]
This is a bogus disingenuous argument which they should know better- Sterile heterosexuals are engaging in a MORAL union, NOT an IMMORAL union when they get married- moral unions ARE allowed- IMMORRAL Unions are NOT allowed- which is why sons can not marry mothers or fathers or sisters, people can not marry corpses, people can not marry animals
The article you cited clearly is trying to get homosexuality off the list of immoral acts, and they are using absolutely asinine arguments to do so- and they should be ASHAMED of themselves for trying to be judicial legislators instead of objective upholders of the law!
Great catch
BUMP
Fabulous article! The real sexual revolution was the 10 commandments!
I borrowed the article and posted it. Thank you very much for showing it to me!
I so agree.
Morality means nothing...except when its THEIR morals.
Then yours do not count.
It should be up to the states, if not spelled out in the Constitution.
“Don’t make a federal case about it” used to be a saying that was rooted in common sense.
They don’t call them Sodomites for nothing!
Scalia’s knowledge of sexuality in pagan Greece/Rome is lacking.
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.