4 reasons liberals should be wary of legalizing gay marriage

[Ptarmigan]

4 reasons liberals should be wary of legalizing gay marriage
http://theweek.com/article/index/241903/4-reasons-liberals-should-be-wary-of-legalizing-gay-marriage

ased on oral arguments at the Supreme Court on Tuesday, it seems unlikely that there are five votes to recognize a constitutional right to same-sex marriage — the most sweeping option available to the nine justices, and the outcome many liberals and gay-rights supporters most want to see.

But those who support making same-sex marriage a constitutional right should, as the saying goes, be careful what they wish for. Analysts are already reading last rites to California's gay-marriage-barring Proposition 8 — the focus of Tuesday's Supreme Court hearing — but that would affect only California. If the Supreme Court rules that same-sex marriage is a right available to all Americans under the Constitution, on the other hand, that would invalidate the gay marriage bans on the books in 38 states. Here are four possible downsides to legalizing gay marriage — for its liberal supporters:   

[Mr Mannn]

Just read the article. Its argument is weak.

There is no downside to this. This just opens a floodgate for a million lawsuits against any who oppose the gay/liberal agenda. Far easier to rule through the courts than affect change democratically.

[Wineslob]

Just read the article. Its argument is weak.

There is no downside to this. This just opens a floodgate for a million lawsuits against any who oppose the gay/liberal agenda. Far easier to rule through the courts than affect change democratically.

The proof is this statement by a local Lezbo: " Now we just need to get social justice for our trans-gender brothers and sisters".


Ya, "trans-gender" and "brothers and sisters" in the same sentence.     

[RobJohnson]

I think I might be a lesbian. I want special rights. Where do I sign up?

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

Just read the article. Its argument is weak.

There is no downside to this. This just opens a floodgate for a million lawsuits against any who oppose the gay/liberal agenda. Far easier to rule through the courts than affect change democratically.

Yep.

The SRA will be distorted. "Places of public accommodation" will be used to harass anyone not currying favor with the flitting little thugs.

[thundley4]

Are churches considered places of public accommodation?

[obumazombie]

I think I might be a lesbian. I want special rights. Where do I sign up?

Welcome to my world my lesbian brother.

[Dori]

Just read the article. Its argument is weak.

There is no downside to this. This just opens a floodgate for a million lawsuits against any who oppose the gay/liberal agenda. Far easier to rule through the courts than affect change democratically.

Not just the gay/liberal agenda either.

Polygamists welcome Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage predicting relationships with multiple people will be next

[Wineslob]

Not just the gay/liberal agenda either.

Polygamists welcome Supreme Court rulings on gay marriage predicting relationships with multiple people will be next

Oddly, I have no problem with Polygamists. If you're stupid enough to want more than one wife.................... 

[Eupher]

Oddly, I have no problem with Polygamists. If you're stupid enough to want more than one wife.................... 

If you think welfare abuse is a problem with single mothers who keep spitting kids out (different fathers, natcherly) so they can keep collecting from the state, then you'd better take a long, long look at polygamists.

Tom Green comes to mind.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Green_(polygamist)