RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: Voices from our pro-equality future (present?) » Anti-gay orgs continue to offend children of single parents, gay parents, more » Apple CEO gives 'substantial' sum to HRC's southern state project; may or may not have used ApplePay » Conservative proposes new way for vendors to tell gay customers they don't care for them » NOM versus David Koch » Anti-equality baseball player calls reporter 'a prick' for asking about his anti-equality advocacy » Audio: Josh Duggar defends discrimination, invalidates own point » Audio: AFA's Fischer names 'homosexual agenda' as 'greatest threat to liberty' in American history » Audio: AFA Radio caller calls for executing gays; FRC-employed host doesn't even challenge him, much less condemn » NOM president's other organization is 'in trouble' (his words) too  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

10/11/2011

Pre-nups or Pre-'Lawrence': What do 'protect marriage' groups *really* want?

by Jeremy Hooper

While most social conservatives don't come out and admit it, the "traditional marriage" movement's real problem is not even with marriage equality itself, but rather with the Lawrence vs. Texas ruling that overturned this nation's "sodomy" laws. Which of course means that most within this movement would be quite happy if private, consensual sex was criminalized, the inverse of Lawrence's justice.

But sometimes they do admit what's apparent to those of us who cover this stuff. This month, in its official magazine, it's the North Carolina Family Policy Council that's quite plainly doing so, with NCFPC staffer Mary Summa, J.D. (who once worked for Jesse Helms), writing a whole article decrying Lawrence and how it "opened the legal floodgates for future legal attacks on 'morality laws.'” Check it out:

1109-SexualLibertySP,FN

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails