Pondering the impact of MA's same-sex 'marriage' decision
Jeff Johnson - OneNewsNow - 8/1/2008 4:00:00 AMBookmark and Share

homosexual marriageMassachusetts has become the second state in the union to allow homosexual residents of other states to obtain "marriage" licenses. Now supporters of traditional marriage wonder how this will impact the California marriage protection initiative and the pro-family movement.

 

Yesterday Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed a law allowing homosexual couples from other states to get "married" in Massachusetts. The Bay State now joins California in legalizing same-sex marriage" without restrictions.

 

Story continues below ...


Results from our related poll

Because of developments in Massachusetts and California on the issue

of homosexual 'marriage,' is a federal marriage amendment

needed more now than ever?

08200801


 

But in November California voters will consider a constitutional amendment defining marriage as only the union of one man and one woman. Attorney Brad Dacus, president of the Pacific Justice Institute, says the outcome of California's vote on Proposition 8 could make Massachusetts "ground zero" in the battle to save marriage.
 
"Massachusetts becomes the 'sicker patient in the hospital,' by far, if we in California are successful in amending our state constitution as, once again, between one man and one woman," said Dacus. "Massachusetts will then be the place, instead of California, where homosexual couples fly to...get married....[T]hat's just a major leak in the dam that's got to be patched up...if we're going to keep a major flooding of the homosexual agenda from being poured out on all the states across the country," he warns.
 
If both California and Massachusetts choose to endorse homosexual marriages without restrictions, Dacus believes advocates of traditional marriage will be left with only one option. "This will only give greater need for the pro-family movement to focus on a national amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman," he remarks.

 

Dacus contends that leaving the definition of marriage to individual states will pose a serious long-term threat to the institution of marriage in the United States.

 

For commentary on this story check out In the Fight blog by clicking here.

 


Rate this Story (1 Star = Not so Good -and- 5 Stars = Excellent!)

Please log in to comment on this story.

Click here to log in


Comments on this article:
  • "i really have to wonder. boycotting Idaho grown potatoes cut into french fries and packaged in Kansas factory by american workers and served in a texas coffee shop somehow was supposed to show the French that they were wrong. there is an expression that perfectly encapsulates that level of idiocy but i can't use it here."
  • "This emphasizes the reason we need an amendment to the U.S. Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman. We have needed it for a long time. Here is Indiana, John Hostettler, a strong anti-abortion, pro-marriage, constitutionalist was voted out of office because he opposed an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. He believed it should be a state issue and not a federal issue. He lost his seat to Brad Ellsworth who said he was pro-marriage and pro-life. But Brad endorsed Obama. Can you believe how Ellsworth betrayed his constituents? We will remember come next election, Brad. Traitor."
  • "This whole battle is a boycott against god. Who ever told you people that you were empowered to declare war upon others who are god’s children? There is only one judge and you are not it!!! Justice will be served!"
  • ""We boycotted...French fries.."? All we did was to change the name of them because the French dared to disagree with "our president". Such intelligence that comes out these comments! And now, here we have a situation, where the Right Wing has been screaming about letting the PEOPLE decide the issue! But there is a very real chance they might not go the way you want. What are you going to do then? Boycott California? Really?! When few enough things that we buy don't already come from China?"
  • "this time at leasst it wasn't the people or legislators of CA but the judges that overturned the voice of the people. Over 60 % voted against gay marriagee the first time and the courts still ruled in favor of gay marriage. a boycott wouldn't affect this situation, it would only hurt the working class folks that barely make ends meet."
  • "Because we imported fries from France?"
  • "When same-sex "marriage" becomes legal, the word "morality" should be removed from the dictionary. This word should have been deleted when the heinous act of abortion became legal! America cannot save herself... Our forefathers would weep!"
  • "Why don't heterosexuals focus on the sorry state of their marriages and the fact the 50% or more end in divorce and stop worrying about same-sex marriages. You believe we are only 1% of society, so we are not a threat to you or your families. We love families too, and the fact that we want to be married and live in caring, loving monogamous relationships should be applauded, not criticized. When we don't get married, we are labeled promiscuous; when we do get married, we are targeted as a threat to society. Go work on improving your own community and we will work on ours. Let us just respect one another, and together we can make the world a better place. Jesus does not hate gays; but sadly it seems that conservative Christians do. Whily you say you hate the sin, not the sinner; sorry, we're not feeling the love."
  • "We boycotted French wine,fries,etc..so we can boycott California wine,oranges,etc...Respectfully;John McIntyre"

Other Stories in Culture


If you believe OneNewsNow.com is an important source for Christian news,
please consider a
 
small tax-deductible gift for this service. 



The Matt Friedeman Show - Live!

In the Fight Commentary