Quote:
Originally Posted by drakhar
|
Bless your heart, you actually believe polls conducted by government controlled media are intended to assess opinion accurately...rather than to mold it and report the results as if it were "news"?
The polls that matter are the ones involving ballots; numerous states have held referendums on same sex marriage, most notably California with Prop 8, and all but one (Maine) have come down solidly on the side of traditional marriage. Of course the ruling class, specifically the judiciary, bowed to the expressed will of the people only in Maine...but spat on the will of the people in all the other states.
If the same-sex marriage touts really believed their cause would carry through the democratic processes....you know, debates and elections, then they wouldn't have needed 5 unaccountable judges to decide the issue. Had the democratic processes been allowed to play out, then the outcome would have been more acceptable to both sides....this travesty, however, is likely to be contentious for the foreseeable future just like Rowe v. Wade, another instance of democracy circumvented, has been.
And speaking of 5 UNACCOUNTABLE judges...Imagine the chagrin of agenda homos everywhere had just one of those shitbirds come down on the other side! Shut down right there! Schtumm! No recourse. Of course this decision affirming same sex marriage won't even come close to making the agenda homos happy...it's just the next rung on the ladder of a hierarchy of privilege and special protections....which the current clientelist government will gladly provide them in exchange for campaign contributions, which - after all - is how all this got started. You know, when mega-wealthy homos hit Barky in the hand with millions to bring about his miraculous "evolution".
Regarding the implied connection between same-sex marriage bans and inter-racial marriage bans...there's no similarity. The ban on inter-racial marriage was discriminatory...discriminatio n actually means disparate treatment of two similar things...so to treat marriage between a man of one hue with a woman of another differently from one between a man and a woman of the same hue is to discriminate between them. However, a marriage between a man and a man is dissimilar to one between a man and a woman. Therefore, not discriminatory to ban it.
But not all is lost...maybe SCOTUS has given us a way to fuck the IRS by avoiding the Death Tax: imagine wealthy old widow, Great-Aunt Maude, on her death bed marrying her beloved grand-niece Suzie....and Voila! Fuck You, IRS. Suzie won't be forced to sell the ranch just to pay the fucking tax!
My Bio Page - Texas - Houston
