« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

The Future of Marriage Will be at Stake Next Week

By: Daniel Horowitz (Diary)  |  November 1st, 2012 at 10:54 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

The most important issue for conservatives on election night, aside for the individual elections, will be the question of gay marriage. Maryland, Minnesota, Maine, and Washington – all blue states – will be holding ballot referendums on gay marriage.  In three of those states, we will be playing defense.  If the ballot question passes, gay marriage will be recognized in those states.  In Minnesota, we will be playing offense by proposing a state constitutional ban on gay marriage.

Over the past decade, we have won 32 times – a 100% success rate whenever the issue was placed before the people.  However, after 6 years of indefatigable campaigning from the homosexual lobby and criminal insouciance from our side, we face an uphill battle in preserving marriage.  It’s especially rough that the landscape this year includes blue to very blue states.

Nonetheless, the polls are tightening up, and if past history is any indication, we always overperform the polls on this issue.  If you have any friends or relatives in these states, please advise them of the following information:

-          Maryland: The state passed gay marriage last year, but a successful petition drive has placed it as a referendum on the ballot.  It’s called Question 6.  We want a no vote.   A yes vote would uphold the gay marriage law.

-          Washington: Same story as Maryland.  The state legislature and governor signed a gay marriage law that is now before the voters as Referendum 74.  We want a no vote.

-          Minnesota: Vote Yes on Amendment 1. This is a constitutional amendment - “Recognition of Marriage Solely Between One Man and One Woman.”

-          Maine: Question 1 seeks to upend a 2009 ballot initiative that banned same-sex marriage –  Do you want to allow the State of Maine to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples? We want a no vote.

The important thing is that gay marriage has never passed muster with voters.  The few states that passed gay marriage did so at the behest of the courts or the politicians.  Once they win with the voters once, they will begin rolling back many of the state constitutional amendments we passed during last decade.

Conservatives must realize what we are up against.  There is a strong and vocal minority of people in this country that are in a race to the bottom to radically alter the fabric of our nation to reflect that of the most decedent society conceivable.  If we don’t combat them now, all the other issues will be irrelevant.  There is no way we can have a society that is demanding anything and everything that is sordid, yet one that is austere and conservative regarding dependency, welfare, and entitlements.  Fiscal conservatism and family values are indissoluble.

We can always recover from fiscal depression.  We will never recover from moral bankruptcy.

Tags: , , , , ,
Get Alerts

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • kipling

    Excellent post! You nailed it with: “There is no way we can have a society that is demanding anything and everything that is sordid, yet one that is austere and conservative regarding dependency, welfare, and entitlements. Fiscal conservatism and family values are indissoluble.We can always recover from fiscal depression. We will never recover from moral bankruptcy.”

  • jhawk90

    It’s worth noting that in MN if an individual does not vote on the amendment, it counts as a NO vote.

  • finbar

    I’m worried about the future of Obama’s marriage. Nobody likes a loser.

  • phototiger

    These are important races, but what concerns me most is that this issue is on the dokcet to go before the Supreme Court this session. Although they may give it back to the states to decide, which would create a crazy patchwork of conflicting laws in the same nation, I fully expect the crazy libs (that’s redundant, I know) on the S.C. such as Kagan and So-to-may-or (“The wise Lah-teen-ah”) to vote in lockstep with their liberal overlord Barry. Roberts has turned into a wild-card vote because of his flip on ObamaCare, so it’s anyone’s guess how he’ll vote.

  • http://madisonproject.com/ Daniel Horowitz

    That’s true. If Kennedy joins the 4 extremists in asserting that states lack the right to define marriage as marriage, then they will overturn all the ballot amendments.

  • naraht

    Yes, in Minnesota in order for an amendment to pass it must receive a majority of the votes cast in the election. 9 yes, 8 no and 3 blanks means that it doesn’t pass since that is 9 yes out of 20 votes.

  • naraht

    Functionally yes, but the way that the cases going to the supreme court are written and some of the ballot amendments are written, a ban on performing Gay marriages would still be there. Utah wouldn’t have to *perform* a marriage between two men, but would have to give the same rights to a marriage between two men performed in Iowa that it does to any other marriage done in the US…

  • rationaldb8

    Hi folks,

    Apologies for posting here with something unrelated – but would someone tell me how articles get promoted from the diaries to the main page? Is it completely based on the number of facebook likes received (in what timeframe?), or something else?

    Also, can multiple article by the same author show up on the diaries page on the same day, or are they limited to one a day or ?? I posted two articles yesterday, and one isn’t showing up on the diaries page for some reason. This one isn’t showing up on the diaries page: Is Obama Leading from Behind Really Smart Power? http://www.redstate.com/rationaldb8/2012/10/31/is-obama-leading-from-behind-really-smart-power/ even though clearly it exists. But The Confidently Ignorant President is showing up fine http://www.redstate.com/rationaldb8/2012/10/31/8/ . I emailed RedState about this, but no reply yet.

    Do both diaries and front page show up in the redstate rss? I’m new to posting on redstate, although not to reading some of the excellent articles here!

    Thanks so much in advance for your help!

  • Common_Cents

    WOW!!! is that clearly spelled out? I’d not heard of that at all.

  • naraht

    BTW, in Maryland, Question 6 isn’t the one with all of the commercials, that is Question 7. Question 7 basically allows for the expansion of Gambling in Maryland to allow Table Gaming at one particular place just south of the DC Beltway (and a few other things). The Questions in Maryland are
    1& 2, require that the Judges of the Orphan Courts in Baltimore City and PG County respectively have in good standing in the State Bar.
    3, adjusts some of the law so that a state elected official is removed from office when pleading guilty to certain crimes, not when the trial is completely formally over
    4, Maryland version of Obama’s DREAM act.
    5. Keep the Democrat Gerrymander for the Congressional Districts
    6. Marriage
    7. Gambling

    Note on 5, as best as I can tell in the law, if 5 is no, then the same people who made the current Gerrymander can do it again and we’d vote with the same districts in 2014 bring it to a question again and again have the state vote No. But it is necessary so that if enough Republicans are elected in 2014 to block it, *then* both parties would get a say

  • jhawk90

    It’s on the MN Sec of State website under FAQs –
    Q: Is it true that if I don’t vote on a constitutional amendment, it is the same as a “no” vote?

    A: Yes,
    that is true. Constitutional amendments by law must be passed by a
    majority of all of the voters who vote on Election Day. Therefore, if
    you don’t vote on this question the effect is the same as a “no” vote.

  • rnorris68

    I have to say as a fiscal conservative
    Who cares??
    really?? There are more important fights to have.

  • westcoastpatriette

    One of the mods could probably answer better than I, but I will share what I know.

    Keep in mind that RedState just went through a major redesign that included a switch to Discus and not all of the kinks have been worked out yet. But, you are the second person I have heard ask if we can only post one diary per day. If so, we have not been told that. FYI, I also had a diary I published disappear into cyberspace a few weeks ago. It posted for about five minutes and now there is no record of it at all anywhere including in WordPress.

    With respect to getting diaries promoted to the front page, it is my understanding that this decision is made by front page contributors and mods and has nothing to do necessarily with the popularity of the diary. I am not aware of standards they use to make that determination since judging the value of a diary can be somewhat subjective, but if enough of them are impressed with one, it gets promoted.

    Hope this helps.

  • fightnright

    With a nod to the late Douglas Adams: the left went on to vote that any partnerships imaginable were identical to real marriage, that having both a mother and a father was not the best way to nurture children, and to top off decreed that there were no emotional or physical differences whatsoever between the sexes.

    Oh, that was easy, said the left, and for an encore goes on to prove that green is red and red is green and gets themselves killed in an auto accident on their next trip to the court house.

  • Locked and Loaded

    Don’t worry; just like Billy Jeff and Hill, the dough will come washing in, and Queen Moochi will still be on the throne. Hey, she might even end up the junior senator from Hawaii.

  • lapert

    For the record on question 7 it would permit table games at all the casinos (five existing and a new one that would also be authorized by the affirmation of question 7 outside DC in PG county).

  • http://www4.webng.com/rickbull/lostlucky/ rickbull

    Rotate the W in Washington 90 degrees counterclockwise and you get the double-entendre 3M (the folks who make Scotch® Tape)–underlying meaning: once you pass it, you’re stuck with it!

  • ru14me2c

    One thing to keep in mind though, is the “When they came for me, there was no one left to speak up.” story.

    “In Germany they came first for the Communists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

    Continue to let the government take away ANY rights, or allow them to do whatever they please, whenever they please, however they please; whether the issue at hand is important to you or not, and no one will be left to object when they snatch what you hold dear away from you ….

  • synchronicityii

    You do realize that Douglas would almost certainly be on the opposite side of this issue from you? I doubt very much he’d appreciate his words, even paraphrased, being used to argue against gay marriage.

  • herbster

    The fact that voters object to homosexual marriage matters not to the present administration. If the current occupant living in public housing at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. is reelected, homosexual marriage will become law, one way or the other. It is now being “Sold” to the sheeple as a “Civil right.” Joseph Goebbels lives on, my friends, in the state run media. Through the corrupt senate, through executive order, some way, this so-called “Right” will become the law of the land. Also, if the curerent occupant is reelected, he will have multiple nominees to the Supreme Court. Associate Justice H. Clinton? Associate Justice E. Holder? Associate Justice C. Sunstein? Associate Justice M. Bloomberg? Make up your own list of horrors. It will make no difference. The rollover, spineless republicans in the senate will vote approval. Term limits, anyone? As for the Minnesota non vote being a “No” vote….not to worry. We can fix anything.

  • Freiheit

    You’re comparing the government depriving me and my future partner – and possible future children – of our equal rights and protection, thus effectively making me a second-class citizen, to Nazi persecution of fiscal conservatives?! WT(Actual)F

  • mrsbadcrumble

    http://weeklysift.com/2012/09/10/the-distress-of-the-privileged/

  • Locked and Loaded

    The government is not depriving you of anything. If your future partner is of the same sex as you, the two of you won’t be creating children. Your rights and protections will be exactly the same as anybody else’s, so, no, you will not be effectively made a second-class citizen.
    Now, if you read carefully (and truthfully), you will see all of the above contains factual information, not opinion. If you believe otherwise, your tendencies have impaired your ability to reason logically.
    Just because homosexuals and others who want to step outside the bounds of natural heterosexual union want to hijack the age-old institution of marriage as it has always been known, denial of that arrogation does not constitute any imposition on your rights and protections. It seems by your own actions you make yourself a second-class citizen if you say you want children and willingly enter into a relationship which necessitates the involvement of heterosexuals (and the government that deprives?) to make it happen.
    Oh, and you have a foul mouth – at least in writing.

  • gabs

    Agreed, rnorris. First of all, who cares on the personal level. We all marry who we want to marry. This doesn’t have any impact on those of us who marry people of the opposite sex. Number two, harping on this right now harms the real cause. Want to lose by a razor thin margin? Keep bringing up things that just don’t matter as far as the economy.

  • PowerToThePeople

    He knows that, problem is, admitting it does not help his charge to “free” the gays from all of us evil straight republicans. This has been his tired ole pony since the day he joined the old site.

  • fightnright

    I say codswallop.

    Like most brilliant men, Douglas Adams had a keen sense of humor and relished piercing debate and irony. He hated illogical thinking, and it is difficult to imagine his support of using it even in favor of a cause he supported. I doubt very much he’d have been so small-minded as to be miffed at having his own words turned sharply against him in jest, and I further suspect he’d dismiss you as a frivolous churl.

  • streiff

    I’m sure your opinion is interesting to you but it makes my teeth hurt. I think most of us know you have no more contact with the shade of Mr. Adams than do the rest of us. Don’t do this tiresome nonsense in the future. It is a very poor evolutionary strategy.

  • Pingback: URL

  • Pingback: Stan Benzee

  • Pingback: CASINO ONLINE