The mindless readiness of Republicans to compromise on homosexual “marriage” bill
A story in today’s New York Post backs up the points made in the previous entry that Republican opponents of the same-sex “marriage” bill have indicated a willingness to vote for it if it excludes religious organizations from its non-discriminatory mandate. The Post reports: “[T]he simple fact that opponents were willing to talk about legislative bill language gave eventual passage of the bill an air of inevitability among advocates and foes alike.” These senators must be made to understand that giving churches such an exemption still leaves non-church organizations and conscientious individuals exposed to prosecution if they decline to provide services to same-sex couples. And that it will mean that homosexual “marriage” will be presented in the schools as normal. And that it will inevitably mean that the words “husband” and “wife,” “father” and “mother,” will be removed from the law and ultimately from our language.
By the way, what position has the Post editorial page taken on the bill? Given the paper’s leftward drift on homosexual-rights-related issues, I wouldn’t be surprised if they are supporting it or at least not opposing it.
UPDATE, June 19: I’m told by a regular reader of the Post that the editorial page has opposed the bill, but without much energy.