Their Great Dream
Posted on 03/03/2004 10:44:38 AM PST by mrustow
Posted on 03/03/2004 9:38:57 AM PST by AntiGuv
ALBANY, N.Y. - New York's attorney general said Wednesday that same-sex weddings are prohibited under current law, throwing a potential hurdle into the plans of two mayors to preside over gay nuptials.
Meanwhile, across the country in Oregon, gay couples lined up for a sudden chance to wed after a county commissioner there said she would begin issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
In a statement obtained by The Associated Press, New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said he would leave it to the courts to decide if state law prohibiting same-sex marriage is constitutional.
"I personally would like to see the law changed, but must respect the law as it now stands," Eliot Spitzer said in a statement obtained by The Associated Press.
Spitzer said New York's law contains references to "bride and groom" and "husband and wife" and does not authorize same-sex marriage.
Both sides of the polarizing issue have been waiting for Spitzer's opinion since last Friday when the mayor of New Paltz, a small college town 75 miles north of Manhattan, married 25 same-sex couples. Village Mayor Jason West now faces 19 criminal counts and could face jail time.
On Wednesday, Nyack Mayor John Shields said he would also start marrying gay couples and planned to seek a license himself to marry his same-sex partner.
Shields told The Associated Press he will start officiating at weddings of same-sex couples as early as this week and planned to join other gay New Yorkers in visiting municipal clerks' offices Friday seeking marriage licenses.
(Last week, Spitzer refused to do his job, preferring to pawn off his repsonsibility on the courts. That was before Ulster County DA Donald Williams Jr. stepped up to the plate. See what a difference one courageous public official can make?)
I was watching some program the other night and it featured a Roman Catholic nun who recently published a book on the root causes of the current "pedophile" scandal in the chuch. The interviewer asked her whether homosexuality may have something to do with the scandal. Her response was not really. When the interviewer mentioned that over eighty percent of the incidents were between priests and teenage boys, her response was oh yes but these were dysfunctional homosexuals.
It's reached a point in this country where one can no longer call a spade a spade without modifying one's response in order to force adherence to the "politically correct" view.
Ain't it the truth?! But how the heck can it be that way, when the country is opposed, 2-1 to gay marriage. A clue sahowed up the other day, when an article said that Pres. Bush didn't want to alienate "moderates" -- it's those goddamned suburban moderates again, the same ones who support illegal immigration and affirmative action!
No way should anyone who dissents from the "politically correct" view on these issues provide a reasonable or cogent argument in opposition to the "heterophobes" arguments lest we either end up on the backpages or included only because our views demonstrate our inherently backwards, bigotted and "behind the times" views, which directly confirm the argument that the "heterophobes" are making.
I was watching some program the other night and it featured a Roman Catholic nun who recently published a book on the root causes of the current "pedophile" scandal in the chuch. The interviewer asked her whether homosexuality may have something to do with the scandal. Her response was not really. When the interviewer mentioned that over eighty percent of the incidents were between priests and teenage boys, her response was oh yes but these were dysfunctional homosexuals.
"Dysfunctional homosexuals." I love it! Whether or not the sister is homosexual, she is definitely part of the radical movement that has infiltrated the RC Church over the past 30 years, and whose members bear the greatest responsibility for the pedophilia scandal.
It's reached a point in this country where one can no longer call a spade a spade without modifying one's response in order to force adherence to the "politically correct" view.
Yup. And by the time you're done "modifying" your view, you ain't got no view left you can call your own. Remember, a half truth is a whole lie.
RealClearPolitics 'blogMORE GAY MARRIAGE: Al Sharpton from last night'sDemocratic debate:
J. McIntyre
Friday, February 27 2004I think this is not an issue any more of just marriage. This is an issue of human rights. And I think it is dangerous to give states the right to deal with human rights questions. That's how we ended up with slavery and segregation going forward a long time.When I heard this it occurred to me that for those who believe that gay marriage is an issue about fundamental fairness and equality of the law, this is really the only intellectually sound position. If this issue is truly analogous to the old laws which barred interracial marriage in many states (a common arguing point for the pro-gay marriage side) then Sharpton is exactly right that leaving this to the states would be immoral and wrong.
I, under no circumstances, believe we ought to give states rights to gay and lesbians' human rights. Whatever my personal feelings may be about gay and lesbian marriages, unless you are prepared to say gays and lesbians are not human beings, they should have the same constitutional right of any other human being.
Does anyone think for one second that this countrytoday would stand for the argument that it is OK for Virginia or Alabama to pass laws barring interracial marriage? Of course not.
So if gay marriage is fundamentally about basic civil rights for all citizens in this country, then I don't see how gay marriage proponents can honestly argue for a "states-rights" system that would legally discriminate against individuals in some states.
FEDERAL MARRIAGE AMENDMENT:
I understand the reticence to alter the Constitution, and I myself am unsure whether I would support the FMA. But it is disingenuous for Senator Kerry to say he is against gay marriage and that the issue should be left up to the states.
Given what is happening in the real world in Massachusetts and San Francisco, and given the Supreme Court's decision on sodomy earlier this year and the Full Faith and Credit clause of the Constitution, the reality is that if you are truly against gay marriage and you want the laws of the nation to reflect that opposition, the only viable option is probably an amendment to the Constitution.
So where do you stand? If you think this is an issue of basic human equality then Sharpton is right and a "states-rights" position is morally wrong. If you are against gay marriage and want the laws to reflect that position then you are going to have to face the uncomfortable truth that a Constitutional amendment might be the only way to make that a reality.
A simple question to someone who is supposedly against gay marriage would be:"Would you support an amendment to the Constitution enshrining marriage as between one man and one woman if that was the ONLY way to legally preserve the sanctity of marriage. Yes or No?"If the answer is "no" then it doesn't seem to me from a public policy standpoint that that person is against gay marriage.
“Angered by President Bush’s crusade to make it illegal for them to marry, Rosie O’Donnell and her lesbian partner, Kelli Carpenter, joined the rush down the aisle in San Francisco yesterday….
What total crap, lies, prop-speak...at a loss for words.
These people are hateful, vile, and want to conquer us. Reminds me of Kruschev beating with his shoe and saying "We will bury you!"
Seventy five percent gay? You don't suppose there's any discrimination in hiring going on here do you? Naw, can't be. Just like there's no discrimination in hiring college professors even though they're ninety percent Democrats (read Marxist/Socialist). Where's the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission when you really need them. Apparently nowhere to be found. What a surprise.
Their Great Dream
| What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda |
|
|
| Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1) |
|
|
| The Stamp of Normality |
It's not you, mrustow....it's this subject....the 'love' that won't shut up....
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.