Haven’t they been around all through history and in all societies?
It is plain to see that there is nothing in the law or the constitution that would lead the judges to conclude that homosexual marriage must be the public policy of the state of Calif. They made up a new right to same sex marriage.
And it’s plain to see that whether to have homosexual marriage is a POLICY judgement, not a CIVIL RIGHTS judgement.
Decisions like this can, over time, erode public confidence in law and order and the judicial system, because the decision is so obviously not based on interpreting the existing law and constitution.
Then you could argue, why even have a legislature, why have the provision for public votes through initiatives, and why have a governor? Since judges are just going to make decisions anyway, all we need are judges.
And this case and similar cases show that all you have to do to side step the legislative process is make something a civil right, gets judges to agree, and your policy becomes the law of the land.
We’re having an ongoing debate in the pres. campaign about universal health insurance. Can you imagine somebody will be inspired to file a lawsuit, and get a judge to declare that healthcare is a civil right? Suppose somebody gets inspired to file lawsuits about the environment and global warming, and get a judge to find a civil rights violation somewhere? Then the matter is under the jurisdiction of courts, not the legislative process.
This case has ramifications beyond homosexual marriage and homosexual civil rights, because of the absurd legal reasoning used to reach the conclusion.
From what I have read, yes, most all societies.
They have also been treated as the deviates they are, hence they stayed in the "closet".
Is it normal for you to tell perfect strangers that you are heterosexual? (providing you are) Or, are your sexual preferences something that is no ones business but yours?
I don't give a damned if you (anyone) is queer. Once I know, I will avoid that person, as I would any leaper.