Select Page

Gay marriage is here to stay … period

Gay marriage is here to stay … period

In terms of gay issues, there are a lot of things the American people can oppose.  Most notably, the introduction of sexuality – including alternative practices – to prepubescent children.

Several years ago, I suggested to Republicans – and a lot of Democrats, too – that opposition to gay marriage was a loser.  Even before the Supreme Court decision protecting the right of gay individuals to marry, gayness had become largely normalized in society.

Anti-sodomy laws were taken off the books by legislative action or court decisions – or just ignored in terms of enforcement.  Activities from which gays were banned became commonplace – such as cohabitating and open employment. Openly gay candidates have been elected and appointed to high office.  Gays serve openly in the military.  Gay couples can adopt children.  Gay life is celebrated with parades, flags, and parties which draw visitors and tourists.  Gay neighborhoods have become tourist attractions — such as Chicago’s “Boys’ Town.”  (Sorry ladies, that is what they call it.)

My son’s Catholic grade school had students with same-sex parents – and a Catholic University my daughter attended had “gay club” events listed on the bulletin board.  Gay characters are seen in a positive light on both the silver and the small screens.

None of these things were allowed in American society – by law or culture – 50 years ago.

The Supreme Court decision was arguably the final act in the legitimization of the gay lifestyle.  Just as the American people are not racist in nature, we are no longer homophobic.  Yes, there is significant disapproval of the lifestyle – especially among religious groups, such as Catholics, Muslims, and Baptists.  But even those who disapprove have accepted gay folks as part of the society – even part of their own families.

The last gasps of political opposition to gay marriage came at the end of the 20th Century when there were still efforts to pass a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. It lacked sufficient public support to gain footing in Congress.  As late as 2008, candidate Barack Obama declared himself opposed to gay marriage – declaring that marriage can only be a union of one man and one woman.  The shifting tide of public opinions forced him to abandon that position.

Those on the left argue – even predict – that gay marriage will be the next target of the Supreme Court conservative majority.  I doubt it for two reasons.  Unlike abortion, public tolerance of gays is much stronger and deeper than support for unrestricted abortion-on-demand. In addition, acceptance – if not always total approval – of gay folks does not involve the killing of a developing human being.  The gay lifestyle – like it or not – is a privacy matter that does not deprive a “person” of the right to life.

The issue of gay marriage could be cemented more firmly in American law by an act of Congress.  In fact, it is exactly what the Congress should do – put the issue up for a vote.  I have no doubt that it would garner enough votes to pass – and that any President, Republican or Democrat, would sign such legislation. 

So, why is there no such legislation?  It is the same reason that Congress does not deal with immigration law, the so-called “dreamers,” abortion, establishing a federal budget, and declaring wars.  Congress lacks the institutional courage to deal with controversial issues and exert its constitutional prerogatives.

I understand that many folks have strong feelings about the morality of the gay lifestyle, but woe on politicians who would campaign on de-legitimizing it by legislation.

Democrats use the issue to fearmonger – claiming that Republicans will do away with the rights of gay Americans.  Their claims are nothing more than political nonsense proffered solely for political benefit.  Surely, they know that there is no political gravitas on either side of the aisle to abolish gay marriage.  It is an issue not worth debating.

So, there ‘tis.

About The Author

Larry Horist

So,there‘tis… The opinions, perspectives and analyses of Larry Horist Larry Horist is a businessman, conservative writer and political strategist with an extensive background in economics and public policy. Clients of his consulting firm have included such conservative icons as Steve Forbes and Milton Friedman. He has served as a consultant to the Nixon White House and travelled the country as a spokesman for President Reagan’s economic reforms. He has testified as an expert witness before numerous legislative bodies, including the U. S. Congress. Horist has lectured and taught courses at numerous colleges and universities, including Harvard, Northwestern, DePaul universities, Hope College and his alma mater, Knox College. He has been a guest on hundreds of public affairs talk shows, and hosted his own program, “Chicago In Sight,” on WIND radio. Horist was a one-time candidate for mayor of Chicago and served as Executive Director of the City Club of Chicago, where he led a successful two-year campaign to save the historic Chicago Theatre from the wrecking ball. An award-winning debater, his insightful and sometimes controversial commentaries appear frequently on the editorial pages of newspapers across the nation. He is praised by readers for his style, substance and sense of humor. According to one reader, Horist is the “new Charles Krauthammer.” He is actively semi-retired in Boca Raton, Florida where he devotes his time to writing. So, there ‘tis is Horist’s signature sign off.

6 Comments

  1. D.D

    To even suggest that a child that is commonly described as a TOM-BOY should be declared as being gay or trans before they get a chance to grow up is absolutely “LUDICROUS”! ! !
    To push them to believe that they’re actually something they are not us equally wrong !

  2. Patrick

    Gays radical agenda has been ALWAYS!!! in their end intentions, since it started in the late 60’s and 70’s, now the have the good side of ignorant ( good intention) people general population hiding their true extreme RADICAL agenda .
    But what is happen in the class room its because their main OBJECTIVE was to get into the SCHOOL BOARD mainly ( socialist oriented at least here in ONTARIO, CA) help by in the last 20 years , 15 of those 20 ( we had a Premier of the Liberal Party she was a Gay Female) they went deep into the root and fiber of our society, this Premier ( gay herself) provided them with an ADVANCE AGENDA of their twisted mind ( I image the same in the US because like the democrat party they have the same “talking Points) ).
    AND TODAY we see the results of the last 20-30 years.

  3. Larry kuhn

    Gay means happy. Those people ain’t happy. That’s why they’re always in our faces with that crap. They know it’s wrong

    • mellie

      And HOMOSEXUAL “marriage” is NOT marriage, either. I wil never “accept” homosexualism being “normailized” or “mainstream” because that can never be. It may take another Sodom and Gomorrah, or worse, to fix this horrendous problem. God help us.

  4. EMMA

    GAY MARRIAGE?? NEVER WILL I ACCEPT SUCH A CHARADE,
    THEY NEED TO LEAVE OUR CHILDREN ALONE WITH THEIR SICK AGENDA.
    OBAMAS REBELLION AGAINST ABSOLUTE TRUTH TRANSFORMED AMERICAN POLITICS, GOVERNANCE , DIPLOMACY, POLICING, MORALITY, RACE, SEX, TRADITION,AND CULTURE IN SUCH A WAY THAT SHOCKED VOTERS INTO ACTION.
    UNLESS AMERICANS REPENT, OF BREAKING GODS LAW AND TEARING APART THEIR FAMILIES, NO COURT, PRESIDENT OR OR OTHER LEADER CAN MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN.WE ARE LIKE ”SODOM AND GOMORRHA”

  5. frank stetson

    Oye, folks are just looking for equal rights for all couples. Should really not be that big a deal UNLESS you think being gay is some sort of evil, which many still do. Even though it exists in every nation, every culture, every religion, you think it’s wrong, by nature.

    Funny thing is all the Republicans pushing for the bill. Wanna bet family and close friends trumps party on this one. Good for them.

    Guess you need to add to your “enemies” list, well these you have: Collins, Romney, and Murkowski. But now you need to add: Portman (gay son), Tillis (like the religious liberty protections, yeah, sure), Tillis concept ditto for Blunt, Burr, Capito, Lummis (religion too), Sullivan and Young (after talking to his voters).

    Your rowboat is getting smaller and smaller…….

  1. Frank and Larry, I agree with both of you! Just another trifecta of joy and harmony! I do think Frank…