So-called “Same sex marriages” (ugh!) on their way to become a major issue in 2012 race

The liberal teacher couldn't explain why Cinderella didn't fell in love with the step sisters.

This is National Organisation for Marriage‘s Brian Brown:

“When the Iowa Supreme Court did the unthinkable in 2009 and invented a right to gay marriage in Iowa’s state constitution, they set off a powerful voter reaction that is still unfolding. First, voters threw out all three Supreme Court justices who faced voters in the retention election, including the Chief Justice. Next, Iowa voters will elect a presidential candidate who has pledged to take concrete steps to preserve marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Finally, Iowa voters will elect a pro-marriage majority that will put forward a proposed constitutional amendment reversing the activist decision by the Supreme Court.”

Of course, you may say that the NOM has all interest to amplify the real situation on the ground, but from what can be seen from the other side of the Pond he is not very far from the mark, though perhaps a bit premature if we extend his statement to the US as a whole.

Still, it is rather probable that NY’s decision on institutionalised sodomy will have nationally sa bit of the effect that the 2009’s decision of Iowa’s Supreme Court had – and is still having – locally.

As it happens so often, it is only when shocking things happen that we understand the scale of the attack brought to Christianity as the basis of Western civilisation. Paradoxically, the decision of the State of NY might have contributed to the awakening of too many people whose only reaction to homo propaganda was indifference or a kind of benevolent smugness.

Mundabor