Well, this is nice. Does this mean that the National Review is repenting from publishing its last pro-gay marriage article?
This was what some said after Dred Scott,BTW. Didn't quite work out as planned.
It is easily forgotten, however, that Roe too was followed by a brief burst of support, especially among the young. But the mockery Roe made of the Constitution, the ideological tyrannies it inspired, and most of all the very real horrors of its effects have caused it to be viewed increasingly as the Dred Scott of our times, and pro-life sentiment has grown.
Have to, sadly, put myself among this group. I fell, initially, for the abortionist propaganda.
I believe in the integrity of words. Until recently, the word ‘marriage’ simply meant ‘the union of one man and one woman in holy matrimony’. Just because some judges decided it was their place to change the meaning of the word, doesn’t make it so. Which word will be next?
Oh, wait. I just realized what the next word is......woman. ‘They’ are redefining the word ‘woman’ to mean ‘anyone who thinks they are a woman, is a woman’. But this time the DNA screams the correct gender. No matter how the phenotype looks.
Being black and being homosexual are not the same thing in spite of what the media and leftists might want us to believe.