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

Skip to comments.

Why gay marriage is inevitable (The war is all but over, even as the battle continues)
Los Angeles Times ^ | 02/12/2012 | Michael Klarman

Posted on 02/12/2012 6:42:34 PM PST by SeekAndFind

The year 2012 is shaping up as a big one for same-sex marriage. Last week, the Washington state Legislature passed a bill allowing gay marriage, and legislatures in Maryland and New Jersey may follow suit shortly (though New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has promised a veto). North Carolina and Minnesota are conducting referendums this year on constitutional amendments to bar gay marriage, and Maine is likely to conduct a referendum on legalizing it.

On Tuesday, the U.S. 9th Court of Appeals reminded us that courts too have something to say on the subject. In a case challenging the constitutionality of California's Proposition 8, that court ruled in favor of gay marriage. Because its ruling was so narrow that it may not be applicable outside California, theU.S. Supreme Court may decide not to review this decision. Eventually, though, the Supreme Court will take a gay marriage case. How might the justices decide it when they do?

As recently as seven or eight years ago, there might not have been a single justice prepared to declare a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage. Opinion polls then showed that Americans opposed gay marriage by a 2-1 margin, and a Massachusetts court decision declaring a right to gay marriage under the state constitution produced an enormous political backlash in 2004, with 13 states enacting constitutional bans. Even liberal justices such as Ruth Bader Ginsburg andStephen G. Breyer, who probably sympathize with gay marriage, might well have been wary of venturing too far in advance of public opinion and stoking further political backlash.

The situation has since changed dramatically. Opinion polls now consistently show that a slender majority of Americans support gay marriage. State supreme courts in California, Connecticut and Iowa have ruled in its favor, and legislatures in five states have enacted gay-marriage statutes.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Political Humor/Cartoons; US: California
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; samesexmarriage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

1 posted on 02/12/2012 6:42:37 PM PST by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Next will be marry your Pet. Incredible! 5000 years of culture down the drain.


2 posted on 02/12/2012 6:44:53 PM PST by entropy12 (Islam is intolerant of every other religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
On Tuesday, the U.S. 9th Court of Appeals reminded us that courts too have something to say on the subject.

How many states would have queer marriage if it were left up to the people and courts didn't legislate.

Plus the 9th circuit is one huge joke.

3 posted on 02/12/2012 6:46:18 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Eccl 10 v. 19 A feast is made for laughter, and wine maketh merry: but money answereth all things.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

They already married some idiot with a building in Seattle so we’re getting there..


4 posted on 02/12/2012 6:51:12 PM PST by max americana (Buttcrack Obama is an idiot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Women have lost their “equal rights” and don’t yet know it.


5 posted on 02/12/2012 6:52:20 PM PST by donna (I want to live in a Judeo/Christian country where we know that, before God, men & women are equal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
First it was, "Stay out of my bedroom!"
Now it's, "I insist you celebrate my queerness!"

It is sickening, and the country's courts and leaders who allow it are sickening.

6 posted on 02/12/2012 6:52:50 PM PST by grobdriver (Proud Member, Party Of No! No Socialism - No Fascism - Nobama - No Way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

If homosexuality is legitimized in that sense, then it won’t be long before criticism of it will be criminalized; because people will always voice criticism of something that’s wrong.


7 posted on 02/12/2012 6:53:06 PM PST by old school
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Why gay marriage is inevitable??

End times.


8 posted on 02/12/2012 6:53:11 PM PST by prairiebreeze (Who are you and what have you done with Ann Coulter?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Africa, China and the ME will never accept it, so if the West wants to kill itself, so be it.


9 posted on 02/12/2012 6:55:59 PM PST by Clock King (Ellisworth Toohey was right: My head's gonna explode.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Alternate Headline: Why God Will End This Mess Very Soon

Looks to me like within three and a half years to four years.

10 posted on 02/12/2012 6:56:07 PM PST by Ron C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze

Time feels short.
I am predicting a big earthquake in Washington State soon.


11 posted on 02/12/2012 6:56:16 PM PST by right way right (What's it gonna take?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze

My bet too!


12 posted on 02/12/2012 6:57:18 PM PST by Ron C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
The 9th Circuit is always reminding us that insanity is a communicable disease.

Look, let's say we get the Presidency, the House and the Senate ~ time to FIX the 9th.

I say send them to Fairbanks.

13 posted on 02/12/2012 7:00:17 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I would like to hear some one (anyone) state the obvious about the liberal agenda. Gay couples exercising civil contracts can have all the amenities enjoyed by married heterosexual couples. Their goal is to simply destroy the meaning of marriage.

Similarly, there are no "health" benefits associated with the taking of birth control pills. This argument Obama has created is simply an attack on religion.

14 posted on 02/12/2012 7:00:56 PM PST by Baynative (Please check this out - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFIcZkEzc8I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Coming soon - threesomes, quartets, ...n, n+1,.....”marrying”. But....God is not mocked..


15 posted on 02/12/2012 7:01:59 PM PST by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Actually the battle is over because it will never be won. The public will NEVER consider homosexuals married. After homosexuals went with the “nice” term gay to describe themselves, gay became an insult among kids. That should tell you all you need to know about what will or will not happen no matter what the government defines.

People think you are married when a man and a woman join in union. The public will probably never consider two same sex people married.


16 posted on 02/12/2012 7:04:09 PM PST by JLS (How to turn a recession into a depression: elect a Dem president with a big majorities in Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

So is the eventual destruction of American, but we shouldn’t be gleeful about it.


17 posted on 02/12/2012 7:04:25 PM PST by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Baynative
I agree the goal is to destroy marriage.

It is not inevitable. But it will lead to plural marriage and chaos - a consequence of weakening marriage. This can be concluded from the so-called Russian Experiment of the late 1930s and early 1940s where the communists set a plan to destroy the major institutions, among them the family and religion. The consequences were so devastating that they had to reverse their attacks on the traditional family.

18 posted on 02/12/2012 7:07:13 PM PST by Dante3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Its not about ‘marriage’, they don’t want ‘marriage’ they want government enforced approval of their abnormal lifestyle.


19 posted on 02/12/2012 7:09:05 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: old school

It will be the “New Black” and covered by all the Civil Rights laws and associated Bureaucracy and taught in schools.


20 posted on 02/12/2012 7:09:57 PM PST by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: entropy12
God caused the Great Flood because man was a sick animal. Homosexual activity has been around almost as long as human history. Sodom was destroyed for the same thing. The world is going straight down the prophetic word of God. The days grow short. We live in the end times. Recognize them and know what is going on. Only through the Lord will you survive all this. This is just the beginning. The birth pangs. It is going to get worse, much worse, till the Tribulation. Only one way out, that is through Jesus.
21 posted on 02/12/2012 7:15:57 PM PST by RetiredArmy (POLITICIANS: Promise the moon. Deliver the shaft.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

Not Fairbanks...Pyongyang perhaps?


22 posted on 02/12/2012 7:18:07 PM PST by SgtBob (Freedom is not for the faint of heart. Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

it’s about as “inevitable” as fitting a round peg into a...round peg


23 posted on 02/12/2012 7:22:17 PM PST by bigbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SgtBob

Not cold enough!


24 posted on 02/12/2012 7:31:10 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I note that the authors of this piece utterly fail to factor in the extremely rapid spread of treatment resistant syphilis and gonorrhea in the last few years. Given the level of promiscuity in the homosexual subculture, and the rapidity (compared to aids) with which those progress a rapid shift in societal attitude is likely.

There is nothing new under the sun, and God will not be mocked.

25 posted on 02/12/2012 7:33:55 PM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
The 9th Circuit is always reminding us that insanity is a communicable disease.

whachoo say.

26 posted on 02/12/2012 7:36:59 PM PST by the invisib1e hand (religion + guns = liberty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

They might end up with a peice of paper, but it still ain’t marriage. That is conducted only in the eyes of God, and He made His thoughts on the whole homo thing pretty clear at Sodom and Gomorrah.


27 posted on 02/12/2012 7:49:38 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The first step was the introduction of no fault divorce.


28 posted on 02/12/2012 7:50:36 PM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Massachusetts is the granddaddy of the gay marriage states, having been legal due to court order for almost 8 years now.

In Massachusetts, only about 20% of homosexuals in relationships are “married”. That’s not 20% of all homosexuals, that’s 20% of homosexuals who identify as being in a relationship.

So it seems that the homosexual activists are fighting hard for these marriage rights, then, once they gain that right, they decide they don’t really want to get married!!

So it does seem that they want governmental/societal approval of the lifestyle, but don’t really want to be “married” to their same-sex partner.


29 posted on 02/12/2012 7:50:45 PM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Its not about ‘marriage’, they don’t want ‘marriage’ they want government enforced approval of their abnormal lifestyle.

I think the real reason is so they can get on the group health plan where one of them works...(and be forced to pay for Contraception)...(snort!)

30 posted on 02/12/2012 7:53:52 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

As you mention God and His plan for marriage, this brings up another issue on the horizon as homosexual marriage spreads. Namely, are churches going to be sued for discrimination if they don’t perform homosexual marriages? Is there any mainstream religion today which does not consider homosexuality a sin, much less endorse through marriage in their denomination?

I hope and pray that the homosexual activists don’t start lawsuits against churches. That could be a future battle in this whole marriage issue.


31 posted on 02/12/2012 7:57:51 PM PST by Dilbert San Diego
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: All

Still - STILL ! .. Not one of my liberal friends, or anyone I’ve approached on the topic, can tell me why gay people want to get married.

I’m Married, before god and the state. I married a lovely woman, and together we are actually quite powerful to create a really nice environment. It’s calm, it’s stable, and it’s fun.

But if a religion bans you from getting married, and you’re not a member of that religion anyway, Why would one want to play ? That’s pretty similar to me bitching that I can’t be handfasted, or that I can’t marry multiple women, or what-have-you. It’s simply not my culture, and I’m not that religion !

Why can’t gays just live together and wear a fancy ring? OH That’s right. There is money to be made in some form.

I forgot.


32 posted on 02/12/2012 8:03:46 PM PST by Celerity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Celerity

And while I’m on the subject : Why do people engage in this sort of behavior, which OBVIOUSLY can’t create children, then demand to have children ? Doesn’t the decision sort of preclude progeny ?

If I decided to be single for the rest of my life - Fine. But then to demand a child from my decision ? Like it’s somehow owed to me ? That’s foolish.


33 posted on 02/12/2012 8:05:25 PM PST by Celerity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

First step was contraception.


34 posted on 02/12/2012 8:07:00 PM PST by TASMANIANRED (We kneel to no prince but the Prince of Peace)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

lol


35 posted on 02/12/2012 8:07:31 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Until normal people can avoid grossing out at the mental image of homosex—homosex will always be considered a deviant sickness even if political correctness makes it illegal to say or even think so...
36 posted on 02/12/2012 8:20:25 PM PST by Happy Rain ("If you're shiftless and in doubt-find a liberal whine and pout-pretty soon you're making out.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donna
Women have lost their “equal rights” and don’t yet know it.

You've got that right. It is natural women who mate with men that are most at risk in this proposition.

37 posted on 02/12/2012 8:24:25 PM PST by Albion Wilde ("The facts of life are Tory." -- Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2
The first step was the introduction of no fault divorce.

The first step was palimony. Then came no-fault divorce. Both products of Californica.

38 posted on 02/12/2012 8:29:42 PM PST by Albion Wilde ("The facts of life are Tory." -- Margaret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Albion Wilde; TASMANIANRED

You both make a good point. It’s not the freaks that are threatening marriage, it’s heterosexuals who aren’t thoroughly commited.


39 posted on 02/12/2012 8:33:42 PM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

Exactly. As I like to say: The love that dare not speak its name has become the love that won’t STFU.


40 posted on 02/12/2012 8:37:30 PM PST by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: freedomfiter2

“The first step was the introduction of no fault divorce.”

I think that has a lot to do with it. More broadly, I think the general decline came when folks were conditioned to think that the state defines marriage instead of recognizing the institution, that it is simply a contract that can be broken and resumed as long as the state says it can. Folks don’t respect their welfare checks either, why should they respect a piece of paper from the state as being meaningful when it is just another lousy gubberment contract?

The second the state got involved, at least in modern times, marriage became whatever judges, pols or the majority thought it could be at any one time. Prop. 8 passsed by 52% in 2008, does it even pass now? In 10 years will it simply be repealed by the amendment process? That’s even if our black robed masters don’t cut out the middlemen.

Freegards


41 posted on 02/12/2012 8:53:51 PM PST by Ransomed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: grobdriver

Fake marriage is every bit as much an affront on the First amendment as this new contraception thing is, complete with so called “hate crimes laws”, that many in both parties support. It is high time Churches push back on ALL of the violations to our God given right, and the trampling of the first amendment .


42 posted on 02/12/2012 8:54:28 PM PST by gidget7 ("When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property." Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

placemark


43 posted on 02/12/2012 9:03:27 PM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Donate here!

We have an election coming and FR must be up and running and healthy if we are going to make a difference.
All contributions are for the Current Quarter Expenses.
In other words, FR could go away if the expenses for this quarter are not met.
Where would you go?

Click here or mail checks to:

Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794



44 posted on 02/12/2012 9:11:06 PM PST by RedMDer (Forward With Confidence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
So it does seem that they want governmental/societal approval of the lifestyle, but don’t really want to be “married” to their same-sex partner.

Point in fact. The lesbian couple that forced the issue in Massachusetts got their marriage, and a few years later, were quietly divorced. They had achieved their goal, which wasn't marriage at all, but a government 'stamp of approval' on their lifestyle...

the infowarrior

45 posted on 02/12/2012 9:19:54 PM PST by infowarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah

FAIRBANKS????.....NO....Siberia!


46 posted on 02/12/2012 9:20:50 PM PST by goodnesswins (2012..."We mutually pledge our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego
Namely, are churches going to be sued for discrimination if they don’t perform homosexual marriages?

This is why the abortifactent/contraception issue is so important right now. If the Government is permitted, even through accounting tricks, to force a church to go against its basic principles (a violation of the establishment and free exercise clauses of the First Amendment), then there is no limit to the degree government will decree church policy.

FOr all the babble of the 'wall of separation', there will be none, the State will have usurped the powere of the church to determine doctrine.

It used to be that if you didn't like what was on the menu, you were free to go elsewhere. Now everyone has to serve the whole state-approved fare.

It is the difference between equality of rights and equality of results.

47 posted on 02/12/2012 9:24:32 PM PST by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Nonsense, I read the back of the book. We win.

Once more into the breach, dear FRiends.


48 posted on 02/12/2012 9:50:26 PM PST by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

This article is late to the party.

I posted about this subject a number of days ago:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2843523/posts?page=48#48


49 posted on 02/12/2012 10:17:32 PM PST by Road Glide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

I’m gonna start fighting for polygamy. That will be awesome. Now if I can find just one woman who would walk across the street to spit on my shoes, I will have begun.


50 posted on 02/13/2012 12:48:16 AM PST by dsrtsage (One half of all people have below average In the US the number is 54%)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-59 next last

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