End of the Gay Marriage Debate

[MikeWaters]

There have to be some liberals licking their chops to have their name associated with such a case, so that they can go into the Liberal Hall of Fame.

Nevermind the law and the constitution.

And the lawyers that are bringing the case, same thing.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

There have to be some liberals licking their chops to have their name associated with such a case, so that they can go into the Liberal Hall of Fame.

Nevermind the law and the constitution.

And the lawyers that are bringing the case, same thing.

What's interesting is that Ted Olson and Boies filed this case under the noses of the gay liberal advocacy groups, who did NOT want to go the federal constitutional route. One, they didn't think they had 5 votes at the Court (Kennedy will again be the deciding vote), and a loss at the Court would be devastating and put back the federal constitutional route a generation. Two, they learned the lesson from Roe: a victory could actually mean a loss as a federally mandated right to gay marriage would cause a backlash and revive efforts to pass a federal amendment banning gay marriage. Etc. etc.

So actually a lot of the traditional liberal advocacy groups are NOT participating in this case b/c they disagree with the strategy.

[MikeWaters]

Olson appeals to.....emotion, for his legal argument.

It's just plain mean to not let gays marry. And being mean is unconsitutional.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/12/us/12prop8.html?hp

I've been saying for a while that I don't see a compelling case for gay marriage. Neither do I see societal collapse with it.

But one thing I am CERTAINLY ABSOLUTELY against--is this privilged class of jackasses foisting this on the American people.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

But one thing I am CERTAINLY ABSOLUTELY against--is this privilged class of jackasses foisting this on the American people.

If by privileged class you mean 5 philosopher-ethicist-justices on the Supreme Court, I heartily agree.

[Tex]

Hawaii legislature kills gay civil unions bill. The bill was tabled (as opposed to actually being voted down) for fear of voter backlash in an election year, even though it appears to have majority support among legislators. That sound you hear is Cali's head exploding.

This, of course, in a state with a 45-6 Democrat advantage in the state house, and a 23-2 advantage in the state senate.

Via Instapundit.

[Levin]

Enjoy the small victories, Tex. The tidal wave of the new generation is about to overcome you (if SCOTUS doesn't do it first in 2011 or 2012). Hope you have some scuba gear.

And I maintain my position that if gay marriage is used as a wedge issue, as a central issue in the 2012 presidential debate, that will be the last time, for all intents and purposes, that it will be used as such. This is not like abortion.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Levin

Enjoy the small victories, Tex. The tidal wave of the new generation is about to overcome you (if SCOTUS doesn't do it first in 2011 or 2012). Hope you have some scuba gear.

I assume you are referring to the Prop 8 challenge currently in federal court? If not, please elaborate so I can prepare for this tidal wave.

Originally Posted by Levin

And I maintain my position that if gay marriage is used as a wedge issue, as a central issue in the 2012 presidential debate, that will be the last time, for all intents and purposes, that it will be used as such. This is not like abortion.

*shrug* Fine. I doubt gay marriage will fill in as a major issue, unless the Supreme Court forces it to be. A large majority of Americans have already spoken out on this issue via ballot initiative or legislative action, so there's no need for it to be a central issue.

[Levin]

Originally Posted by Tex

I assume you are referring to the Prop 8 challenge currently in federal court? If not, please elaborate so I can prepare for this tidal wave.

The tidal wave is the rising generation, and it's overwhelming support for gay marriage.

The SCOTUS reference was to Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the Prop. 8 case.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Levin

The tidal wave is the rising generation, and it's overwhelming support for gay marriage.

The SCOTUS reference was to Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the Prop. 8 case.

You can't even tell me who's going to be in next year's Super Bowl, or who will be president in 2016. Not sure why anyone should believe what you think about how the public will vote on gay marriage in 10-20 years.

But if that helps you sleep at night, more power to you. I deal in reality, and the reality is that 30+ states have restricted it in some form or other, and it continues to fail in the most liberal of states around the country. Barring some truly heinous act of judicial activism at the high court, that is a high bar to reach, even for a so-called tidal wave.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

You can't even tell me who's going to be in next year's Super Bowl, or who will be president in 2016. Not sure why anyone should believe what you think about how the public will vote on gay marriage in 10-20 years.

But if that helps you sleep at night, more power to you. I deal in reality, and the reality is that 30+ states have restricted it in some form or other, and it continues to fail in the most liberal of states around the country. Barring some truly heinous act of judicial activism at the high court, that is a high bar to reach, even for a so-called tidal wave.

First of all Tex, I agree with you on this issue. But you are burying your head in the sand. The margins get narrower and narrower with every election. Demographic trends are the easiest ones to predict and are unsettling.

Some of us cry all is well in Zion because traditionalists have more children. Well, traditionalists have always had more children, and the margins are still narrowing.