NEWS ANALYSIS Same-sex marriage momentum stuns both its backers and foes

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | March 5, 2004 | Carolyn Lochhead

[calcowgirl]

Same-sex marriage -- considered so radical that mainstream gay rights leaders feared its emergence in an election year -- has gained a level of visibility that even its most ardent proponents did not imagine just two months ago.

Whether intentional or not, President Bush's pledge in his State of the Union address in late January to defend traditional marriage touched off a reaction that began in San Francisco and now is rippling across the country.

[calcowgirl]

ping

[OpusatFR]

"Foreman said. "It was Bush's calling upon Congress (last month) to amend the Constitution to forever prohibit the recognition of same-sex marriage that propelled the proponents of equal marriage rights into overdrive."

BULL BULL BULL BULL BULL!!!

Somebody needs to squash that lie. It was the wholesale lawless activism lining up homosexuals to get "licences" that propelled it.

THE LEFT LIES LIES LIES

(Sorry about the caps and fit of pique.)

[blackdog]

I am very unclear on just what the momentum is backing this effort which is so far out of the zone it's surreal. It's got politicians at local and state positions thumbing their noses at the law for a 2% constituency.

Taxes, education, drugs, and such beg for the same rebellious stands but go unquestioned. But gay marriage........?

[blackdog]

Actually, I think these people have a real IRS and state revenue department problem. If they file a tax return using married status indicating such, they could face some serious financial problems a few years from now after the IRS applies 30% interest and penalty per year.

[rellimpank]

----the only "momentum" fag marriage has is created by the media----

[goldstategop]

We haven't been hurt. We want the Democrats to act crazy. And their doing so beyond our wildest dreams. No, Hillary this isn't an invention of the VRWC!

[blackdog]

Whoah! Easy does it there!

Count to ten and relax.

[rod1]

So if our elected mayors who take oaths to uphold laws can pick and choose the state laws they would enforce or ignore/disobey with no consequences, does that mean I can ignore (without fault) a couple too--like the speed limit and state tax laws which I personally find highly unfair and offensive?

[blackdog]

The upside to gay marriage is that it will keep lawyers engaged in gay divorce, leaving industry and medicine alone in relative terms.

I think that may be what's the behind the scenes driver on gay marriage.

The gay community is being rope-a-doped right out of their assets. Lawyers will get most of it.

[rellimpank]

---sounding like a broken record, I repeat my call for three thousand California gun owners to go to San Francisco and demand to be issued concealed weapons permits as provided for by state law--

[rellimpank]

----I believe I note sarcasm in your post---

[Boundless]

> ... just what the momentum is backing this effort ...

Consider the source of the story, the San Francisco Chron.
You don't even have to read the story to guess what the
thrust of it will be.

Has anyone yet seen any of the supposed new and improved
definitions of what "marriage" is?

If it starts out
"The legal union of two ..."
everyone needs to be clear that "two" is very discriminatory.

Why limit it to 2? There's much more historical precendent
for polygamy than for same-sex marriage. The polygamists
WILL be next in line. They may even try to cut in ahead
of the gays.

And if the newspeak definition continues "... two people ...",
well that discriminates against many people who are quite
fond of their animals.

This is not just parody folks. It's like they say about
buying from Dell - are you sure you want to go there?

[blackdog]

I didn't say bend over and relax.

I just meant that this issue will be self limiting. It's no more grease on the slippery slope that the straight community has slathered all over marriage. The straight community ain't so good at it. At least not to be so good as to be so arrogant to defend it after they, the defenders are defining it's sanctity, while paying child support to/from three different wives and wives are shopping for the next score.

Hardly a good defense.............

[dg62]

We haven't been hurt. We want the Democrats to act crazy. And their doing so beyond our wildest dreams. No, Hillary this isn't an invention of the VRWC!

I hope you know what you are talking about because this is terrifying me. These groups almost always win, and I don't see any kind of reaction from the right. This is scaring the hell out of me. It will be like a coup.

[backhoe]

Cross-link:

-A Gay ( or not! ) Old Time- GM links--

[Lokibob]

When ever you see the words "GAY, LESBIAN, AND SAME SEX" replace it with the correct word "HOMOSEXUAL" and see just how it really should read. It is amazing how it changes the text and feeling of the article.

[EdReform]

Bump

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

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1)

The Stamp of Normality

[madprof98]

"An amendment doesn't have to pass. It's like abortion. The right-to-lifers have been flaying away for 30 years and never notice that they don't win. The Republicans get their energy and the right-to-lifers never get a victory. You get the energy out of a political movement by losing, not by winning."

Giggle, giggle. Smirk, smirk.

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping + at least a Double Bagger Chronicle Alert.

I be very busy right now and just ate, so I can't read anything from the Chron because I value my digestion. Read at your own risk, and make me happy by disemboweling whatever cr*p - I mean fallacious arguments and lies - they spew.

(sorry for the mixed metaphors or whatever they are.)

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this ping list.