Radical Gays Again Seek to Overturn the Will of the People

19 Nov

Posted by MacRanger as News

Is there anyway to annex California to France?…

Once again the loonbat California Court system will attempt to trump the will of the people.

“Reporting from Los Angeles and San Francisco Jessica Garrison — The California Supreme Court voted 6 to 1 on Wednesday to review legal challenges to Proposition 8, the voter initiative that restored a ban on same-sex marriage, but refused to permit gay weddings to resume pending a final decision.

The court may hold a hearing on the lawsuits as early as March, a timetable that scholars said was swift considering the complexity and importance of the legal issues.

The court’s action, taken during a closed conference, suggested that the court wants to resolve all of the legal issues surrounding Proposition 8, including the fate of existing gay marriages, in a single ruling.

It also indicated that at least one of the court’s seven members, Justice Carlos R. Moreno, may be leaning in favor of overturning the measure. Moreno, who joined the state high court’s 4-3 ruling in May to strike down a state ban on same-sex marriage, was the only justice to support granting a stay of the proposition.

In a move that puzzled some legal analysts, Justice Joyce L. Kennard, a generally reliable supporter of gay rights, voted to deny review of the Proposition 8 challenges. The court gave no indication of her reasons but said she was willing to hear a separate case on the validity of existing gay marriages.

Some analysts said the timeline for a hearing in the spring bodes well for the challengers, while others said it indicated nothing about the court’s leanings.”

52 percent of the population said NO, and that’s the will of the people of California via the power of the vote. But just as in 2000 radical gay organizations could care less and seek to ram their life choices down the throats of the rest of us. Note that there is nothing to gain by gaining the right to marry, all privileges of it are contained in civil unions. This is simply – and nothing more – than the beginning of the radical gay movement in America to gain much more power to promote their lifestyle into the mainstream.

4 Responses

retire05

November 20th, 2008 at 10:04 am
1

Sorry, Mac, but this is not the beginnning of the radical gay movement. It has been going on for 20 years. Until now, no one really paid it much attention. And the goal has never been to gain tolerance, the goal has always been to force an “alternate” life style on the United States. As you are seeing in all the protests, the people demanding tolerance and acceptance are the least tolerant and accepting.

But, in some ways, having gay marriage for gays will not change anything for them. Long term relationships in the gay community is not the norm, it is the unusual. But if they are allowed to legally marry, changing the traditional defination of marriage, they will then be considered a “priviledged” class and that is really what they are after. Minority status, that is the goal because then they fall under “affirmative action” laws. A Boy Scout troop will not be able to keep a gay man from being a scout leader; a school district will not be able to refuse to hire a kindergarten teacher because he is gay; they will be given special consideration for all kinds of things under “affirmative action”.

But the argument that they use is that they should have the right to marry just as equally as heterosexuals. That argument, in any court of law, should be moot as they are allowed to marry equally now, just not to someone of the same gender. It is not the right to marry that is the push, it is the right to marry anyone, including someone of the same sex, they want.

I can see this opening a whole Pandora’s Box. If you allow the defination of marriage to be changed for gays, how do you prevent someone from marrying their own daughter? That would be discriminatory.

I don’t feel sorry for the people of California. They have allowed this movement to get out of control. The Folsom Street Fair comes to mind where gay sex acts are actually committed on public streets and no one is arrested.

Gays gain nothing by being allowed to marry. The excuse about not being able to make decisions for their “loved” ones if one gets sick is flat out bull. A living will takes care of all of that and even married straights need to have a living will. A standard will handles any inheritance issues. The one thing they will be able to gain is Social Security benefits and that is the main thing they are after. If one partner dies from HIV/AIDS, the other parter would then be eligible for SS survivor benefits without having reached the age of retirement.

What better way to destroy a society than from within?
Wendy

November 20th, 2008 at 11:16 am
2

Retire 05, I agree with you. One question is they call themselves “gay”. Definition for gay is happy, glad: How many “gay” people to you see is happy or glad? I know many personally and they are not happy, they are mostly bitter and want to push their sick lifestyle on others. They can believe what they want but it is all sin and unfortunately one day when they meet their Maker they will find out. It is NASTY!
retire05

November 20th, 2008 at 12:20 pm
3

Wendy, I have a lot of “gay” friends in my social circle. We have discussed “gay” marriage many, many times. Most of them, not all, agree that allowing gays to marry does nothing but push a social agenda. And would gain nothing for them except a few perks, like affirmative action and Social Security benefits from surviving spouses, that cannot be gained by a will. This whole movement is to force acceptance, not tolerance. It is the same tactic as NAMBLA, which claims that men having an attraction to young boys is just a normal human reaction.

But here is my argument: if you claim that I have no business in your bedroom (and I accept that) then I have no responsibility to be financially on the hook for the consequences of what you do in your bedroom. As a taxpayer, I have no responsibility to pay for your HIV medications you can’t afford. With your right to be you, comes my right to be free from you. If you want to claim that what you do in your bedroom is your private business, then you need to keep that business private.

Homosexuality is not a mark of Cain and is not visable to the eye. There are many men/women who are gay but it cannot be determined by simply looking at a person. It is not your looks, but your actions, that expose your private life style. Who would have ever dreamed that Rock Hudson was gay? Or Authur Ashe?

Basically this is a movement to make acting queer (queer in the traditional sense, not the “gay” sense) acceptable. To act in any outragous manner and have it accepted, not just tolerated.

If the gay movement forces the legalization of gay marriage, it will be based on their premise that homosexuality is a born trait and they should not be punished, socially, for that trait. That allows the door to open for someone to claim that they should be married to a 12 year old because they were born with the trait that causes them to be attracted to 12 year olds. Or a trait that causes them to be attracted to their cousin, their mother or some other sexual attraction that is now illegal. It has been proven that pedophilia is a inherant trait you are born with consequently it cannot be cured.

Pandora’s Box.
Lambda

November 20th, 2008 at 9:49 pm
4

What the hell is the connection with France?

Are you some of this trashy irrational frogs haters ?

If so you’re out of touch and so are all your points…