Remember What Happened In Massachusetts! Same Sex Marriage Opponents React
With same sex marriage legal in NY (gay couples can marry there beginning on July 24) it’s worth revisiting what happened in Massachusetts. From the November 3, 2005 Daily Show.
BRIAN CAMENKER, anti-gay-marriage activist: I could sit here and I could probably, you know, find some way of connecting the dots to gay marriage to all of these [adverse effects] if I had enough time and I did some research.
HELMS: Yeah, why take time to do the research, when saying it is so much faster? Besides, the statistics are clear-cut. Now that gay marriage is legal, Massachusetts ranks dead last in illiteracy, 48th in per capita poverty, and a pathetic 49th in total divorces.
Fresher concerns…
FRC implies legislators were bribed:
“Enormous political coercion has resulted in a profound failure of moral courage in the New York Senate. A clear majority of the people of New York oppose counterfeit ‘marriage,’ but Gov. Cuomo and anti-family lawmakers have shown that their allegiance is to a small but vocal minority seeking to redefine marriage and family.
“The so-called religious protections that were tacked on to the bill will ultimately do nothing to protect the religious rights of New York citizens. As we go forward there is little doubt that the “incentives,” some taxpayer funded, used to sway votes, especially Republican ones, will be exposed.
The NYTimes, I know, lame-stream media, sees an ineffective opposition.
NOM’s Maggie Gallagher in NRO:
New York Republicans are responsible for passing gay marriage. The party will pay a grave price. Here is what we know. In state after state, Democrats who control a chamber in support of their base have prevented votes favorable to marriage: Iowa, West Virginia, North Carolina, Pennsylvania. …
When Democrats are in the minority, they’ve demonstrated an extraordinary commitment to their base — in Wisconsin and Indiana fleeing the state to prevent a vote.
N.Y, Republicans did not have to bring gay marriage up for a vote: What does it mean that they passed gay marriage in N.Y.?
Michael Long, the Conservative-party chairman, has vowed to withhold his endorsement. The National Organization for Marriage has committed $2 million to persuading Republicans: Voting for gay marriage has consequences.
Sad that the N.Y. GOP has caved. Consequences to be continued.
Other than that and the occasional loony hate (see, for example, this from Absolutely Nobama at Free Republic) I’m not finding articulate opposition. (If you can point me to some, please do.)
Instead, even from the NRO, there’s the likes of this from Michael Potemra:
In 1969, Spain was a conservative religious republic, led by the legendary Generalissimo Francisco Franco; and New York City was already Babylon-on-the-Hudson, well on its way to being the crime-sex-drugs-porn-and-atonal-music capital of the world. If I had said to you then, “Forty years from now, one of these places will allow homosexuals to marry each other with the blessing of the state” . . . well, let’s just say you would have made a lot of money if you had bet on Spain.
Spain did it in 2005, six years ahead of the Empire State; and now we have it here in ol’ Babylon. I call it Babylon affectionately; let no one question, on this night, my patriotism as a citizen of the state of Alexander Hamilton, Theodore Roosevelt, and the Marx Brothers.
It’s a good day to be a proud gay American.
