The Detroit News wrote an article by Deb Price about how 'gay marriage' is gaining momentum, in their (distorted) point of view.

An elderly Massachusetts woman felt her opposition to gay marriage melt away after "this lovely couple" moved in next door with their children.

Her change of heart, recounted by the Boston Globe, happened because she came to see the gay men -- among the nearly 10,000 gay couples who've wed in her state since 2004 -- as the neighbors eager to lend a hand.

I had a “nice” neighbor once who was an alcoholic drug dealer. He was there to lend a hand whenever I needed it. He also was a drug dealer with a lot of company going in and out of his house at odd hours of the day. Plus not to mention his ‘friends’ were always staggering TO his house to drink, they were already hammered!

Do I condone their behavior because they were “nice”, no I do not? He has serious disorders and I will not enable him by validating a lifestyle that is morally wrong.

Why then would you want to validate people with homosexual disorders?

"If they can't be married in Massachusetts, they're going to leave -- and then who would help me with my lawn?" she asked, urging her state lawmaker to also change and protect gay couples' right to marry by blocking a referendum designed to abolish that right. That lawmaker did change.

So if my drug dealing alcoholic neighbor were to leave, would I lament the fact that my lawn was no longer going to be mowed? Where do they get this stuff*?

*stuff; referring to the liberal doctrine of MSU*, or, Make Stuff Up™, when unable to push a morally deprived agenda, ie, gay militant lobby for same sex marriage, a precursor to NAMBLA following afterward for legalization of pedophilia, soon to be followed by NAMALA (North American Man-Animal Love Association), you make stuff up like it’s ok to have sex with people of the same gender. Damn the statistics that 95% of all people who are afflicted with AIDS got it from homosexual sex, not to mention that it is an abomination from God.

And so did others, leading to a stunning victory for equality: On June 14, opponents of gay marriage failed to clear a very low hurdle. To put the anti-gay measure on the state's 2008 ballot, they needed just 25 percent of the legislature. They fell 5 votes short.

…failed to clear a ‘very low hurdle’. I guess they forgot to mention that if it were put to a referendum; ‘same-sex’ marriage would have been soundly defeated. So they basically took away the franchise to vote away from the citizens of Massachusetts.

It’s more like a stunning victory for absolutism and tyranny.

The proposal was crushed, 151-45, after Gov. Deval Patrick weighed in against it. Afterward, he declared, "In Massachusetts today, the freedom to marry is secure." Now, a ban couldn't go to voters until 2012, after five more years of lovely married gay couples mowing elderly neighbors' lawns.

Again, I wouldn’t allow my drug dealing alcoholic neighbor to mow my lawn.

June 2007 is the month gay marriage proved it won't always be a "hot button." Massachusetts demonstrated its comfort.

Just days later, the state Assembly in neighboring New York embraced allowing gays to marry, 85-61.

That was the fourth time a state legislative body has voted to open marriage to gay couples. California has done so three times: Nearly two years ago, the Senate and Assembly passed it, but Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed. The Assembly passed it again on June 5 by 42-34.

Failing to mention that the people haven’t voted in a referendum for any of these. Hey, you want to the US Congress to vote for amnesty against the wishes of a substantial majority of the electorate? Why then are the state legislators so afraid to bring the vote to the people? Why is the gay militant lobby so happy to prevent the ordinary citizen to vote on such a “non-hot button” issue?

Gay leaders find success has key ingredients: Build a statewide coalition that includes clergy, unions and business.

Basically get fringe elements from all elements of society and label them as ‘representative of the people’.

Plus, get gay couples and their allies to describe the pain marriage discrimination causes.

Marriage discrimination? If you define marriage as that between a man and a woman, that has been defined as such for ooohhh, since the dawn of time, then the argument is a non sequitur. Can you say ‘gay subsidiarity’?

Also, a governor's support is hugely helpful. Patrick and New York's Eliot Spitzer both won landslides last November as vocal advocates of gay marriage.

"What politicians are realizing is that the smart money is betting on the future, and the fact that young people support this and that the American people are increasingly open to it," says Evan Wolfson, executive director of Freedom to Marry.

If you define denying the people to vote on referendums as “support” and “increasingly open to it”, so be it. It seems as if soviet style democracy is the only way the gay militant lobby is able to push their amoral agenda.

Support for gay marriage is inching toward a majority -- to 46 percent in the national Gallup poll released May 26. Support is overwhelming -- 62 percent -- among voters under 35.

I can sight similar statistics that says otherwise. It seems the militant gay lobby subscribes to MSU™. Look, 99% of my friends are geniuses! See how easy that is?

Equality has friends of all ages, of course. On June 12, the 40th anniversary of the U.S. Supreme Court's Loving v. Virginia ruling that swept away laws against interracial marriage, Mildred Loving spoke up for gay marriage.

Again, when did “marriage between a man and a woman” ever said otherwise? In Sodom? In Gomorrah? Sorry, I meant, San Francisco and New York.

Mrs. Loving, a black woman now in her late 60s, said the case she and her white husband Richard won "can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That's what Loving, and loving, are all about."

As well as for pedophilia and bestiality. Oh, can I mention the “slippery slope” theory now?

Freedoms are secured one court case at a time, one legislature at a time, one lawn at a time. That truly is the American way.

As long as the people aren’t allowed to vote, then it is the (gay) American way.

For the article in question click here.

Shameless Blog Plug of the Day: Recapturing Our Catholic Patrimony (RCP) by PJP & Sarah

Book Review: Arming The Everyday Apologist - Tito, RCP

Last Six Catholic News Postings: For June 22 click here. For June 20 click here. For June 18 click here. For June 16 click here. For June 15 click here. For June 13 click here.

(Hat Tip: Lucianne)

CVSTOS FIDEI EVENING EDITION