Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Hatch: gay marriage will become law of the land
Associated Press ^ | May 28, 2014 7:31 PM EDT

Posted on 05/29/2014 6:51:43 AM PDT by Olog-hai

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch conceded Wednesday it’s only a matter of time before gay marriage is legal across the country, even though he doesn’t think that’s the right way to go.

Hatch said people who can’t see what’s happening aren’t living in the real world. He made the remarks during an appearance on KSL-Radio’s Doug Wright Show. […]

Hatch also questioned whether judges should be able to tell states how to handle an important matter like marriage.

He said he believes nobody should suffer discrimination, and said religious people should try to understand other people’s beliefs. …

(Excerpt) Read more at hosted.ap.org ...


TOPICS: Chit/Chat; Religion; Society; Weird Stuff
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; gaystapo; gopestablishment; goproud; homosexualagenda; logcabingop; orrinhatch; rinos

1 posted on 05/29/2014 6:51:43 AM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Orrin Hatch conceded Wednesday it’s only a matter of time before gay marriage is legal across the country, even though he doesn’t think that’s the right way to go.

He thinks no such thing. If he did he would staunchly oppose this trend with his last breath.

Just another Liberal-lite.

2 posted on 05/29/2014 6:53:54 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
So did abortion. But that doesn't mean we have to roll over for and accommodate it.
3 posted on 05/29/2014 6:54:04 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Whew! That’s a relief. We don’t have to pay attention to “laws of the land” in this country now that Soetoro is on the throne.


4 posted on 05/29/2014 6:54:26 AM PDT by FlingWingFlyer (Obama's smidgens are coming home to roost.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Republicans really want to lose the mid-terms....


5 posted on 05/29/2014 6:54:41 AM PDT by Blue Turtle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

He said he believes nobody should suffer discrimination, and said religious people should try to understand other people’s beliefs. …

Tolerance is a one way street.


6 posted on 05/29/2014 6:55:00 AM PDT by Lets Roll NOW (A baby isn't a punishment, Obama is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Hatch is a disgusting flake.

I can remember when this guy was a Mr "I love Ronald Reagan" Conservative. How things change.

7 posted on 05/29/2014 6:56:27 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The homosexual community has achieved great wealth, power and influence in modern day America. They very well may have the power to overturn civil laws and enact new ones to their liking. However the bottom line is that the inherent vile nature of homosexuality will never change. Its acceptance into American culture along with widespread abortion, drug use, pornography and fornication underscores the reality that America has entered an era of neo pagan epicurean decadence.


8 posted on 05/29/2014 6:57:48 AM PDT by allendale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Does he also think that other people should try to understand religious people’s beliefs? Or is it just that we have to bend over backwards to accomodate liberal beliefs on marriage?

I’m just waiting to see if the LGBT peoples start suing churches over homosexual marriage. We will have a big split in our culture, in which homosexual marriage is permitted in civil law, but virtually all mainstream religious denominations do not allow it.

The liberals and gay activists have lied about their true intentions all along. First they wanted tolerance. Then they wanted legal rights for civil unions, and said they didn’t want marriage. Then they said that they only wanted marriage in certain states, and had no intention of overturning the Defense of Marriage Act in court. They say they don’t intend to sue churches, but considering how they have lied time and time again about their true intentions in this area, I don’t trust them.

And this is where who sits in our federal courts is important. Liberal judges will likely allow lawsuits and rule against religious institutions which will not permit homosexual marriage. It could happen.


9 posted on 05/29/2014 6:58:09 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego (et)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

This is the kind of mush headed thinking you fall into when you have been in Washington to long.

Term limits before they all go senile.


10 posted on 05/29/2014 6:59:09 AM PDT by Lets Roll NOW (A baby isn't a punishment, Obama is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

So, does he agree that it’s in the US Constitution? That’s where the activist judges keep finding it.


11 posted on 05/29/2014 6:59:47 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

I don’t think Hatch supports same sex marriage.

He just commented on what is happening across the country.

In every state where the voters have approved measures defining marriage as between one man and one woman, judges are striking them down, including in Hatch’s home state of Utah.

This has also happened in my state of CA.


12 posted on 05/29/2014 7:01:31 AM PDT by Trapped Behind Enemy Lines
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
Reminds me of this graphic that the liberals are inculcating which is completely untrue except for Hemingway who is the only athiest in the picture. I watched a video last night that conpletele debunked this graphic with quotes from all of the en except Hemingway where they had made reference to God or a Creator:


13 posted on 05/29/2014 7:02:11 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Someone should tell Orrin that no one has been discriminated against in the subject of marriage.

Marriage being DEFINED as between a man and a woman.

Any homosexual who decided he was done with that charming little perversion has always been free to marry the equally twisted skank of his choice.

What the odious Mr. Hatch should be asking is why we have allowed the judgeocracy to change the law by changing the definition of marriage.

But perhaps his acquiescence in this matter is a secret revenge of the Mormons: we were persecuted because of polygamy. Common cause with the Homonazis?


14 posted on 05/29/2014 7:02:21 AM PDT by Regulator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude
Reminds me of this graphic that the liberals are circulating which is completely untrue except for Hemingway who is the only athiest in the picture. I watched a video last night that conpletele debunked this graphic with quotes from all of the en except Hemingway where they had made reference to God or a Creator:


15 posted on 05/29/2014 7:02:48 AM PDT by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Trapped Behind Enemy Lines
Maybe not, but he's surrendering to it.

And Hatch has gone wobbly on a host of other issues recently, as well. He should retire, he's useless to any cause but his own.

16 posted on 05/29/2014 7:04:57 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lets Roll NOW
Term limits before they all go senile.

We have term limits everywhere. They're called elections.

17 posted on 05/29/2014 7:07:06 AM PDT by fwdude ( You cannot compromise with that which you must defeat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Don’t count your Hatch before he chickens.


18 posted on 05/29/2014 7:07:33 AM PDT by SpeakerToAnimals (I hope to earn a name in battle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Don’t count your Hatch before he chickens.


19 posted on 05/29/2014 7:07:55 AM PDT by SpeakerToAnimals (I hope to earn a name in battle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: allendale

You are correct. The human mind has a difficult time accepting “gay” marriage when they focus their attention on the detailz of what the homosexuals are doing with and to their genitalia, anus, mouth and other bodily parts and functions, specifically brain function not to mention their psychology.

Not good for the people involved
or the society. We should not glorify such destructive behaviors or even legitimize them.

Love the sinner but hate the sin.


20 posted on 05/29/2014 7:09:51 AM PDT by amihow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

He’s the sort of Washington insider who sees the Progressive agenda working through our massive government, and sees inevitability.

In a way he’s right - our massive, debt financed, nanny-state, founded on printed money is rolling toward a logical conclusion

It doesn’t mean he shouldn’t give us an alternative.


21 posted on 05/29/2014 7:11:47 AM PDT by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: allendale

It is a given, the war against perversion has been lost. Does that mean we have to accept homosexuality as right? Absolutely not.


22 posted on 05/29/2014 7:11:54 AM PDT by Coldwater Creek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
No Orrin, the "Law Of The Land" regarding religious freedom is found in the First Amendment to the Constitution ...

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The obvious agenda of the radical homosexual movement is to FORCE Churches to affirm, celebrate and approve that which their logic, conscience, faith and Scripture opposes.

And thus what you (Orrin) cowardly resign yourself to as inevitable as the 'law of the land' will thus prohibit the free exercise of an authentic Christian faith and violate the very CORE of the Constitution that you pledged to defend upon taking office.

23 posted on 05/29/2014 7:15:05 AM PDT by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Hatch is ASSUMING only religion is the reason for objecting to anything goes sex fetish marriage.

There are LOGICAL NON-RELIGIOUS reasons to protect marriage from the hedonists. The fact it is homosexual deathstyle judges making these rulings speaks volumes.

WHERE was hatch on the federal marriage amendment?

Hatch is just a DC insider do nothing stooge.


24 posted on 05/29/2014 7:15:12 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SpeakerToAnimals

There is only way that gay marriage will become the law in every State, and that is Judicial Dictatorship.

The people — as in “We The People” — have voted in the majority of States to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Only dictator judges have the power to suppress the will of the people.


25 posted on 05/29/2014 7:16:29 AM PDT by Oak Grove (H)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

Exactly. Sadly, I agree with him 100%, it will be the law of the land including Full Faith & Credit. But ... doesn’t mean we roll over.


26 posted on 05/29/2014 7:17:29 AM PDT by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Lets Roll NOW

Hatch misspoke

the State’s goal is not to make religious people “understand” other people’s beliefs

It’s to make them live by other people’s beliefs .. and to punish them if they resist


27 posted on 05/29/2014 7:21:34 AM PDT by silverleaf (Age takes a toll: Please have exact change)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Poor Orin Hatch, he doesn't realize it won't stop with gay marriage.

The next thing they want is pedophilia.

28 posted on 05/29/2014 7:21:35 AM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
Your statement makes even more sense once you realize the libtard ruling class is imposing nothing less than a State Religion.

We are not only expected to support it with our tax dollars, we are forbidden to criticize it and expected to pay it obedience.

29 posted on 05/29/2014 7:27:30 AM PDT by Vigilanteman (Obama: Fake black man. Fake Messiah. Fake American. How many fakes can you fit in one Zer0?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Given that gays don’t produce the future of society, I can’t fathom why they would get the same benefits. And where does the money come from as this puts more of a strain on Social Security and the private sector.


30 posted on 05/29/2014 8:12:10 AM PDT by Crucial (Tolerance at the expense of equal treatment is the path to tyranny.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Our flag is Old Glory.

The flag of the Republican establishment is the white flag of surrender.


31 posted on 05/29/2014 8:13:07 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman; Olog-hai
Hatch's fundamental mistake--apart from the fact that he appears to have lost any fight that he might have once had;--is in imagining that social history moves in only one direction. This fantasy is easy to pick up in a City as dominated by Leftists as Washington; but it is a fantasy, none the less.

Take some easily grasped examples of what actually follows periods of excessive license. The Victorian era crackdown on the flaunting of sexual pursuits, followed a quite licentious period. The period in ancient Greece, in which homosexuality was completely accepted, was itself a fairly isolated phenomenon. While Grecian influence on European civilization remained immense in general; such was certainly not evident in attitudes on sexual deviancy.

No Conservative should ever accept the idea that we have to accept the legislated "reforms" that the Left succeeds for a time in promulgating over us. This acceptance can only demoralize our own supporters, while emboldening those who war on our heritage.

Never, never concede the permanence of folly.

William Flax

32 posted on 05/29/2014 8:25:41 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

understand other people’s beliefs. …

Sure now understand my beliefs.

For Rent no gays


33 posted on 05/29/2014 8:42:22 AM PDT by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ohioan

Not even the ancient Greeks gave in to the idea of homosexual marriage. I suspect the idea would have appalled them as portending the downfall of their society. Even they were not intentionally suicidal.


34 posted on 05/29/2014 8:55:36 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
The ancient Greeks may well have had the highest average IQ of any race in the historic period. They would certainly have understood--however corrupted at any period--that homosexual marriage is an oxymoron. The whole function of marriage, throughout the history of civilized peoples, is a sanctification of the process of human propagation & family formation. People who talk or write about any form of same-sex marriage, only demonstrate their confusion of the purpose of marriage.

Why, to make the point even more obvious, has a failure to consummate a marriage by a procreational act, been generally a ground for annulment? The principal ground for annulment? A muscular exercise, intended to simulate sensations associated with the procreational act, between people who do not have the equipment to procreate via that simulation, can never be the required consummation.

While I have not actually been graphic, I apologize to all for suggesting what if graphic would be offensive in a public comment. But my intent is simply to make a point that no amount of rationalized gobble can refute.

William Flax

35 posted on 05/29/2014 9:19:40 AM PDT by Ohioan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

The SCOTUS holding in “Windsor” that dismantled DOMA was based on the presumption that DOMA was enacted for no other reason than animus against people with sexual confusion/homosexual disorder.

A good lawyer can make the secular case, that has nothing to do with animus, for why in the whole history of civilization across all cultures, marriage has been defined as the union of a man and a woman. Heck, a bad lawyer could do it.


36 posted on 05/29/2014 9:26:50 AM PDT by MikeyB806
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeyB806

Our government had no interest in defending DOMA and lost on purpose


37 posted on 05/29/2014 9:27:49 AM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Hatch is probably correct. Gay “marriage” will be recognized as if it was the real thing in all 50 states. Similarly, I will eventually die. Both statements are almost certainly true, but that doesn’t mean I’m going to help either unpleasant outcome along. God didn’t put me here to squander whatever time He might allot me, nor did He put me here to further a destructive agenda that will separate people from scripture.


38 posted on 05/29/2014 10:41:09 AM PDT by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeyB806
"The SCOTUS holding in “Windsor” that dismantled DOMA was based on the presumption that DOMA was enacted for no other reason than animus against people with sexual confusion/homosexual disorder.

A good lawyer can make the secular case, that has nothing to do with animus, for why in the whole history of civilization across all cultures, marriage has been defined as the union of a man and a woman. Heck, a bad lawyer could do it."


So why can't our lawyers do that?

It's like the Prop 8 case. The libs insisted that only animus explained the vote. And the law's oh-so-mighty defenders could only manage one witness to rebut that assertion, a witness who called Prop 8 un-American on the stand!

Judges can only rule on the evidence put before them. Only activist judges ignore the evidence in favor of their own preferences, and yet we keep hoping they'll do just that. It's pathetic, and we need to learn from these mistakes before we lose the next fight, too.
39 posted on 05/29/2014 5:38:04 PM PDT by highball ("I never should have switched from scotch to martinis." -- the last words of Humphrey Bogart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Orrin Hatch has basically signed on to the homosexualist agenda . If you truly “disagree” with fake marriage, you stand up for it, you don’t just sit back.


40 posted on 05/29/2014 6:33:35 PM PDT by CountryClassSF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson