Posted on 12/19/2008 9:11:44 PM PST by fwdude
BTTT!
Expect to see California turn “blue” in 2009.
Amazing how the left is hoping to magnify (through the presses) their "numbers" of activists. And to bully and cow anyone not toeing the gay party-line agenda. This map is a keeper.
The devil is screaming now...have you noticed? Give $100 to the cause and the restaurant you happen to work for is boycotted.
Check out the Alliance website. Lots of great information and case history.
In fact, California has voted against gay marriage twice already. I believe that would happen again. No state has implemented gay marriage because the folks voted for it.
I actually see the opposite happening, and yes, wonderfully amazing to me. As money supply dries up in CA, more people tend to get right down to the nitty gritty levels of Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs. And well, “gay marriage” happens to be one of those luxury items at the top (”actualizations”) on the heirarchy. And that’s why I see the exact opposite of what you suggest to happen.
I shall, and I really must.
I may be wrong, but Massachusetts comes to mind.
I do know that their Supreme Court refuses to allow a vote.
The courts will give it to the queers.
Sorry, gotta part with most Freepers here. Ever heard of inalienable rights? “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”? If that is their liberty and how they can aspire to achieve happiness. Go do it. Have marriages and divorces and everything else. As to how churches deal with it. Let them sort that out. The government should not be in the position of dictating morality.
Our Founding Fathers set up a country of laws, with deference to a Creator, but a country of laws nonetheless. Central to our constitution is freedom of religion and it’s implied right, freedom of no religion. Government is not in a position to tell anyone what to do in their spare time. Beware the slippery slope of goverment involvement in every aspect of your life. Go ahead and give the government more power, next nobody will complain when they get to your demographic
Excuse me, but every law is legislation of a morality. Which kind is the question.
I was wrong. The courts mandated it.
ADF bump!
Murder, child molestation and theft are OK with you, right?
This can’t be right.
Wyoming?
There is something wrong with your map. Please fix it.
I have been fascinated by the culture wars for a long time, and I would question your statement about momentum. Appearances can be deceiving, and the political situation is secondary to the hearts and minds of the people. When Bush was first inaugurated eight years ago, gay marriage was little more than a pipe dream of the extreme left. Most homosexuals were against it, and the whole concept seemed ridiculous to most Americans.
Now, three states had gay marriages legalized by the judiciary. California was rolled back, but the victory cost tens of millions of dollars, and hundreds of thousands of volunteers knocking on every door in California. The victory would be impossible without the tens of millions donated by the Mormon Church, or the hundreds of thousands of black voters who flocked to the polls to vote for Obama. I listen to James Dobsons AFA report, and it was made abundantly clear that should Prop 8 fail, the battle against gay marriage would be lost in America.
The nations youth is increasingly open to the idea of gay marriage, as is the public in general. Democratic presidential candidates can go to a homosexual rights forum without repercussions, Republican politicians support civil unions without repercussions. The Republican Vice President has an openly lesbian daughter. The new President Elect wants to repeal DOMA and Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, while pushing ENDA and hate crime protections for homosexuals.
New York and New Jersey are on the verge of approving gay marriage through a legislative bill. Seems to me that the momentum is going the other way, California was not Stalingrad, it was the Battle of Moscow, a lifeline, but not a change in momentum.
There is something wrong with your map. Please fix it.
I think Wyomians (sp?) are a different animal. They still have the mindset that encompassed America 50 years ago - a cultural fabric that substitutes for laws. I don't think Wyoming is in any danger.
People do not have an inalienable right to perversion. You forget the history of this country. Sodomy was a serious crime in all parts of the land. The pursuit of happiness is a purposely vague term, but it is not an unbounded term, as you would like to make it. It is still a concept bound by the laws of the land.
By your logic, we are restricting the inalienable rights of crooks and thieves to pursue their trade. We restrict adults from their right to marry young children. We restrict people’s rights to marry more than one person. We restrict the right of people to marry animals. we restrict people’s rights to marry inanimate objects.
You see, we have the right to define what marriage is. You can’t just change the definition of what ‘marriage’ is without changing its nature. Marriage is between a man and a woman. That’s what it is. Gay people cannot get married.
The matter of "public good", I'm predicting, will have to come up in the arguments. Right now, the lavender lobby is behaving like a bunch of unfettered gangsters.
The government should not be in the position of dictating morality.
That is a Libertarian, not a Conservative point of view. The Conservative position is that government Can legislate morality if it is to maintain the values of our traditional Judeo-Christian civilization. Therefore, gay marriage, unnatural sex acts, assisted suicide, certain so-called medical procedures, use of certain chemicals, and other acts that violate traditional morality should be illegal and prosecuted by government.
Silly things like freedom and personal responsibility?
But yet there they are on the map.
The left has been focused upon taking advantage of being safe, and having others deal with all the aforementioned entails, while the Marxists plot their agenda. Therefore, what you have written is true; but what is even more fun is.. it's our turn now at playing "backseat driver".
Safety, terrorism, economy has now got to be the Democrat's focus, and this will consume their energy in addition to their "vision", so to speak.
I have seen the future, living as long as I have in the SF Bay area. The more the lavender dictates, the more the children rebel.
Disestablishmentarianism will indeed playout.
Well, that is, if we don't get nuked first.
No, rights based upon amoral characteristics such s race, skin color, nationality, or ideological beliefs that do not transgress basic moral laws, with rights to act out an immoral behavior, is confusion, like as there practice, which is manifestly deleterious to society, medically and otherwise.
Though man and this sad state (MA) made sanction it, God in the Bible never did, and none of the attempts by homoapologists will stand the test of sound Biblical exegesis. http://peacebyjesus.witnesstoday.org/Homosexuality_and_the_Bible_Wink.html
No, the Folks in MA did not vote for it (though they might vote for it if they could), rather it was implemented by a judge. And the legislature denied the Constitution by refusing to allow it to be voted on afterwards.
Massachusetts Legislature Refuses to Vote on Marriage Ballot Measure
Seen by many as means of bypassing democratic process
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/nov/06111006.html
Sorry, you have fallen for a false premise. The Declaration of Independence and Constitution and their predecessor documents are predicated upon the moral behavior that was not perfectly exemplified but clearly codified in the Old and New Testaments.
There was a pro-Bible paradigm throughout the founding years of this country and Jefferson’s infamous Danbury letter assured those Baptists that government would not encroach or establish a State religion. Jefferson also greatly distrusted the judiciary.
There is no such thing as a moral vacuum. This country was founded for, and prospered by, moral absolutes and it is by false premises and deception that public perception is anything else.
It is by fraudulent case law that courts dare continue pushing envelopes.
http://www.Wallbuilders.com is a great resource FYI.
Well, since marriage is a ‘right’, I demand my 5’8”, slim, beautiful FEMALE redhead NOW!
I have a RIGHT to a mate of my desires. Period! I demand the government secure my rights.
Like I said I think that the battle is cultural and not political in nature. It manifests itself in political clashes but the real war is for the hearts and minds of Americans.
I don’t think it matters who controls the Congress, or White House, or how many liberals are on the Supreme Court. The real war is for the nations youth, that is the only battle that matters in the end. I believe that the gay lobby is winning this battle, and nothing short of a massive religious revival will change this.
“The nations youth is increasingly open to the idea of gay marriage”
This is the most Biblically illiterate and morally confused generation this country has ever raised, though they are the most open age group, but with atheism being the fastest growing faith presently among them, while most church are not separated enough from the world or committed enough to effectively reach them.
PS: Living in SF Bay area? Ouch, man. I myself spent three years in Ithaca, NY so I feel your pain.
We don't have more degenerates in the homo-activist camp; they were always there, just much more vocal and militant now. They were the impetus to push through the legal system the issue that led to judicial decisions to allow for same-sex marriage in three states. As for California, I think you are unfairly discounting the significance of the margin that traditional marriage forces won, considering the incredible odds stacked against them: An implementation of the court opinion before the referendum requiring a reversal of the homo-activist momentum; a sabotaged amendment title by the AG; copious donations by out of state homo-activist organizations newly energized by their prospects of victory; an unprecedented surge of new, democratic voters that almost certainly approved homosexual "marriage." Perhaps the Mormon donations tipped the balance, maybe the proposition would have passed anyway - we really don't know.
As for younger voters tending to favor same-sex "marriage," I think that is a valid point. But it is also typical for people to become much more conservative as they mature. I think of all the lame-brained ideas I had as a new voter; you'd call me a flaming lib. Of course, the invasion of Christian faith in my life made a big difference, but maturity definitely plays a part in tempering a person's sensibilities.
As far as Dobson's assessment of the results if prop 8 fails, I completely agree. This is a crucial defining moment in American history. Prop 8 cannot fail, or civilized society is doomed.
My main point in posting the map is to thwart the patently false lies spouted by the leftist that homo-marriage is approved by mainstream America, when nothing could be further from the truth.
mark for later use
Sorry, gotta part with most Freepers here. Ever heard of inalienable rights? “Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”? If that is their liberty and how they can aspire to achieve happiness. Go do it. Have marriages and divorces and everything else
Very well said. Thank you!
The difference being of course that rapists and pedophiles harm others, while gay marriage does not harm others. There wont be one more or one less butt lover out there if marriage is legal. Frankly acceptance of gays will diminish their numbers over generations. Years ago, they would hide by marrying a woman and having kids, thus making more pickle sniffers. Let them marry and go childless
Don’t be a numbnut, those activities harm others. What does it change in your world if your neighbors are two adult bunghole spelunkers? Don’t go to any late night parties at their place and don’t loan them your hampster, but it does not harm your world. They wont turn your straight son gay, those people were born gay. You never made a conscious decision to like naked women right? If you are like most people you were sneaking a look at Playboy before you even knew what the heck you would do if she was in the room.
Thanks for bringing that up. Glad to say I have been a Libertarian Party member (when I joined FR 9 years ago) and still ascribe to Libertarian principles. These last 2 elections have been too important to not vote Conservative however.
If you are a woman and thats what you want, the government should stay out of the way. You can bitch at each other over nothing under a legal state of union. I will stay a single guy and hang out on the weekends, that redhead sounds good....
Perhaps you should post a map showing where those laws still exist. A great deal of "momentum" to be seen there, I'll wager.
I no longer live in SF or the SF Bay Area.
It's just not safe to be in pub ed. On many levels. I know workers have gotten fed up on seeing gays get so many "special rights" and abuse others in the name of those special rights. And their recent behaviors only enforce a perspective that these folks cannot be trusted with constitutional rights, fairness, or decency.
Don't civil unions do this? Is it necessary to go Orwellian on the language and eliminate the distinction between homosexual unions and heterosexual unions? Doesn't it seem like the LGBT lobby is trying to get more than equal legal treatment, and to eliminate the distinction between their practices and normal marriage to confuse the young?
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.