Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Savage: Homosexual activists like Marxists
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, February 25, 2004

Posted on 02/24/2004 11:53:41 PM PST by JohnHuang2

© 2004 WorldNetDaily.com

From his perch at the current ground zero in the battle over traditional marriage, San Francisco-based syndicated talk-show star Michael Savage warns one of America's "last institutions" is under attack from radical homosexuals with an agenda that mirror's revolutionary communists.

"Gay marriage is an oxymoron," Savage said in comments e-mailed to WND. "It is a mockery of marriage by radical homosexuals who wish to destroy one of the last cornerstones of our culture. Those who have studied the communist agenda understand very well that Karl Marx himself derided marriage and family."

He quoted from Marx's Communist Manifesto, which said, "The bourgeois claptrap about the family and education, about the hallowed co-relation of parent and child, becomes all the more disgusting … ."

San Francisco took the unprecedented step nearly two weeks ago of issuing marriage licenses to homosexual couples, and since then more than 3,000 civil ceremonies have been performed. President Bush has been criticized for not taking a strong stand, but yesterday he announced his support for a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage in the United States.

Efforts in Congress to pass an amendment have intensified in the wake of the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision that only full and equal marriage rights for homosexual couples will pass constitutional muster in the state. Under the decision – and barring a state constitutional amendment – same-sex weddings will begin in Massachusetts in May.

Savage said as part of their class warfare, the communists sought to abolish property in general and they considered family to be property.

"In order to abolish the state they had to first abolish the culture; step by step, institution by institution, tradition by tradition, which is why marriage between man and a woman is such an important battle," he said.

Savage addresses the "radical leftists" campaign to "redefine the legal status of marriage" in his New York Times bestseller "The Enemy Within," published by WND Books.

He notes that nearly 40 states have passed a Defense of Marriage Act, and in Nebraska an overwhelming 70 percent of the adult population favored the state constitutional amendment.

Nevertheless, he points out, "the ink was barely dry" when the ACLU rushed to file a lawsuit challenging the decision.

He likens the U.S. Supreme Court decision to strike down Texas' sodomy law to a "loaded gun pointed at the heart of traditional marriage."

"I feel as if we're living in the last days of the ancient Roman Empire, which, as historian Edward Gibbon noted, fell when this kind of degenerate behavior was allowed to take over the public and then the military," he writes in "The Enemy Within."

"Contrary to how they are acting, these nine justices are not our high priests," Savage says. "And nothing poses a greater threat to our liberty and freedom than having a black-robed minority running roughshod over the Constitution."

Savage says the "insane drive" towards homosexual marriage is not the ultimate aim.

"It's about expanding marriage to include polygamy, polyamory, transsexual marriages and open marriage," he says.

"This will be the mother mega-cultural battle of our time," Savage asserts. "Why? If you change the meaning of marriage, you make marriage meaningless."




TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anarchist; anarchy; anarchyinamerica; blackrobedtyrants; civilunion; culturewar; deliverusfromevil; evil; gayintoleristas; gaymirage; gaysmockmarriage; hedonism; hedonist; homosexualagenda; humanist; intolerantgays; lavendermafia; lawlessness; leftdestroysamerica; leftdestroyssociety; leftsagenda; marriage; michaelsavage; militantgays; oligarchy; prisoners; romans1; sf; stunt; talkradio; tyranny; tyrants; tyrantsrule
Wednesday, February 25, 2004

Quote of the Day by LadyX

1 posted on 02/24/2004 11:53:42 PM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Bump
2 posted on 02/25/2004 12:51:48 AM PST by longtermmemmory (Vote!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Savage Nation Bump!
3 posted on 02/25/2004 1:12:44 AM PST by Bonaparte
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
See how they run.......

The SF mayor violates state law. The governator, sensing anarchy doesn't use his police powers to direct the arrest of all those violating law in SF. Rather than get his feet wet, he passes the hot potato over to the AG's office. The attorney generrat could have issued an opinion declaring the entire illegal mess - halting the madness in Sin Francisco, but doesn't. He tosses the potato to the most flagrant activist court in the world - the CA Supreme Court.

The CA AG says he wants to do something he has sat on for his entire tenure - question the constitutionality of the popular passage of a law written by citizens ( not the political slugs in the legislature ) defining marriage as a union of a man and a woman - not Jack and Jack, Jackie and Jackie, Jackie and Rover, Jack and his plastic blowup, or sister Sue and brother Sam.

But wait! There's a citizens group doing a mandamus thing before the Supremes demanding the wholesale anarchy be brought to a halt - now - a legal step the governator and the attorney generrat ran away from.

The moral to this story is wash your hands immediately if a politician touches yours - especially if he says he's favors civil unions of any kind to sodomites.

It's time to return criminal law to the books that criminalized sexual behavior contrary to the norms of a the community.

4 posted on 02/25/2004 1:52:39 AM PST by Robert Drobot (God, family, country. All else is meaningless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
GAY OR STRAIGHT: IT'S STILL HARASSMENT***"There are six girls pending expulsion right now," school district CEO Paul Vallas told me this week. "In some schools it does seem to be part of a pattern of bad behavior in general.

"I don't think it rises to the level of sexual assault. But we're dealing with it. "We have sent out advisories to all of the schools to clarify our policy. We're going to treat this the same as we do any inappropriate sexual behavior.

"We don't differentiate between whether it's boy/girl, girl/girl, boy/boy. We have policies in place that cover this and we are enforcing them."

Four of the six girls facing expulsion are from the Turner Middle School, at 59th Street and Baltimore Avenue, in West Philadelphia, where a group of girls who self identify as "dykes taking over" have allegedly sexually harassed other girls.

At Simon Gratz, a group called the "Lipstick Gang" has been accused of recruiting straight girls into a lesbian lifestyle. Clashes between groups of openly gay and straight girls have erupted.***

5 posted on 02/25/2004 1:53:50 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert Drobot
"....declaring the entire mess illegal...."
6 posted on 02/25/2004 1:54:49 AM PST by Robert Drobot (God, family, country. All else is meaningless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
G'morning, Cincy
7 posted on 02/25/2004 1:59:24 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Hi there JohnHuang2!
8 posted on 02/25/2004 2:00:06 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
;-)
9 posted on 02/25/2004 2:00:36 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Savage is right, Dems have become or maybe have always had communist beleiefs. Commie Rats...great! That explains why the moral decay in our country and the militant actions of the gays recently.

Okay Savage how do we stop this? Can we stop this movement?
Oh wait, yes we can stop it by VOTING FOR BUSH!!!!
10 posted on 02/25/2004 5:12:12 AM PST by stopem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

11 posted on 02/25/2004 6:02:07 AM PST by vannrox (The Preamble to the Bill of Rights - without it, our Bill of Rights is meaningless!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Savage wasn't quite coherent last night. He went on and on about how "gays are taking over all our institutions, and the final step will be for them to convert to heterosexuality."

He said that more than once, and damned if I know what it means.
12 posted on 02/25/2004 6:04:32 AM PST by Xenalyte (I may not agree with your bumper sticker, but I'll defend to the death your right to stick it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The Stamp of Normality
13 posted on 02/25/2004 6:41:13 AM PST by EdReform (Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah; scripter; ArGee; lentulusgracchus; Bryan; MeekOneGOP
Ping


What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda


Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

14 posted on 02/25/2004 6:42:08 AM PST by EdReform (Support Free Republic - All donations are greatly appreciated. Thank you for your support!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; Happy2BMe; autoresponder; yall
Bears repeating ....

"Contrary to how they are acting, these nine justices are not our high priests," Savage says. "And nothing poses a greater threat to our liberty and freedom than having a black-robed minority running roughshod over the Constitution."

Savage says the "insane drive" towards homosexual marriage is not the ultimate aim.

"It's about expanding marriage to include polygamy, polyamory, transsexual marriages and open marriage," he says.

"This will be the mother mega-cultural battle of our time," Savage asserts. "Why? If you change the meaning of marriage, you make marriage meaningless."


15 posted on 02/25/2004 8:37:54 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (The Democrats believe in CHOICE. I have chosen to vote STRAIGHT TICKET GOP for years !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: MeekOneGOP; JohnHuang2; autoresponder; dennisw; Sabertooth
"Contrary to how they are acting, these nine justices are not our high priests," Savage says. "And nothing poses a greater threat to our liberty and freedom than having a black-robed minority running roughshod over the Constitution."

The next step in denying God's sovereignty over the United States will go to these nine people . .

"The question is or at least ought to be, how can such a small, godless, minority have such influence over our courts and legislative processes?"

Answer:

U.S. Supreme Court, 2003 - The Oligarchy*

(All Your Sovereignty Are Belong To Us!)

Justices of the Supreme Court

Back Row (left to right): Ginsburg, Souter, Thomas, Breyer
Front Row (left to right): Scalia, Stevens, Rehnquist, O'Connor, Kennedy

ol•i•gar•chy
Pronunciation: 'ä-l&-"gär-kE, 'O-
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -chies
Date: 1542
1 : government by the few
2 : a government in which a small group exercises control especially for corrupt and selfish purposes; also : a group exercising such control
3 : an organization under oligarchic control

sov•er•eign•ty
Variant(s): also sov•ran•ty /-tE/
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
Etymology: Middle English soverainte, from Middle French soveraineté, from Old French, from soverain
Date: 14th century
1 obsolete : supreme excellence or an example of it
2 a : supreme power especially over a body politic b : freedom from external control : AUTONOMY c : controlling influence
3 : one that is SOVEREIGN; especially : an autonomous state


16 posted on 02/25/2004 8:43:12 AM PST by Happy2BMe (U.S.A. - - United We Stand - - Divided We Fall - - Support Our Troops - - Vote BUSH)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
bump
17 posted on 02/25/2004 8:57:17 AM PST by Lady Eileen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe

18 posted on 02/25/2004 9:07:45 AM PST by MeekOneGOP (The Democrats believe in CHOICE. I have chosen to vote STRAIGHT TICKET GOP for years !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
I still think this homo marriage nonsense is just another ruse to keep our attention shifted away from the real important matters like Kobe, MJ, Martha et al . Realisticly, I think it's still a convenient issue to heighten passions and create a lot of debate while shifting the focus away from the illegals, soaring national debt, the evaporation of thousands of jobs, body bags from Iraq, etc. Sure seems likely it will keep the heat off both of our socialist parties in the coming few months.
19 posted on 02/25/2004 9:14:37 AM PST by american spirit (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION = NATIONAL SUICIDE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy2BMe
Homosexual activists are just like Marxists in that their main method of attack is via subversion and undermining. So far they have our subverted courts doing their bidding.
20 posted on 02/25/2004 9:37:41 AM PST by dennisw (“The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Mike Savage gets it. Some people don't like his style, he's kind of sharp and so on. But he gets it.

Let me know if you want on/off this ping list. A very busy one of late.
21 posted on 02/25/2004 1:22:33 PM PST by little jeremiah (...men of intemperate minds can not be free. Their passions forge their fetters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
bttt
22 posted on 02/25/2004 5:40:15 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe (Gay marriage is an oxymoron)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert Drobot
You've confused the CA Supreme Court with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. The CA Supreme Court is actually quite conservative, as these things go. We removed most of the radicals years ago.
23 posted on 02/25/2004 6:49:32 PM PST by skip_intro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
The marriage amendment should not be necessary. These actions by SF's mayor and the Massachutsetts judiciary are lawless and unconstitutional. We simply cannot amend the constitution every time the left decides to disregard it. We need to hold these officials accountable through impeachment, recall, nullification, interposition and arrest where necessary.

I am so seek of this endless deference to judicial tyranny.

When oh when will some elected executive officer in some state or federal capacity, in fulfilling his constitutional duty to honestly interpet the constitution (federal or state) just disregard the unconstitutional rulings of any court and dare the legislature to impeach him for it? When will some legislature impeach just ONE judge for an unconstitutional ruling?

To say that the courts have the final word on the constitutionality of a law NO MATTER WHAT THEY RULE is to say that the system of checks and balances envisioned by the founders does not exist any more.

Alan Keyes gave the best summation of this issue that I've heard yet. He said that every branch of government has a duty to honestly interpret the constitution. If the president honestly feels the courts make an unconstitutional and lawless ruling, then the president should disregard that ruling and refuse to enforce the provisions that he felt were blatantly unconstitutional. If the Congress felt the president was wrong in this decision, then it was their duty to impeach him for it. If the electorate felt that the Congress was wrong for impeaching the president or the failure to impeach him, they can remove them at the next election, as well as the president for any presidential actions that they considered wrongful.

Lest anyone consider this formula has a recipe for chaos, then I submit to you there is no chaos worse than an unchecked oligarchic Judiciary. We are not living under the rule of law when judges make law up to suit their whims has they engage in objective based adjudication.
24 posted on 02/25/2004 7:21:25 PM PST by DMZFrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DMZFrank
"The marriage amendment should not be necessary. These actions by SF's mayor and the Massachutsetts judiciary are lawless and unconstitutional......"
posted on 02/25/2004 7:21:25 PM PST by DMZFrank

You are correct. All that needs to be done is for the Legislative Branch to re-assert their authority as a co-equal partner.

I gurantee you that if a mayor stated handing out concealed carry licenses to all comers he/she would be stopped posthaste.

25 posted on 02/25/2004 7:43:26 PM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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