Dittos, 

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Back Home Button
The Rush Limbaugh Show
Excellence in Broadcasting
RSS Icon
ADVERTISEMENT

EIB WEB PAGE DISGRONIFIER

The Left Needs the Supreme Court to Rule in Favor of Gay Marriage Because the People Won't

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Now, it's a big, big day at the Supreme Court.

There was a snowstorm, six inches, but it has not stopped the long lines of people trying to get in to watch oral arguments at the Supreme Court on gay marriage and specifically the constitutionality of Proposition 8 in California. And guess what? The LA Times is reporting today that a lesbian who is the cousin of the chief justice is going to attend oral arguments. "Jean Podrasky, 48, a lesbian who wants to marry her partner, will be at Tuesday's US Supreme Court hearing on Proposition 8 in seating reserved for family members and guests of Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.

"'I am so excited,' said Podrasky, an accountant and the first cousin of the chief justice on his mother's side. 'I feel quite honored and overwhelmed.'" Now, the LA times says, "Roberts is a conservative appointed by President George W. Bush in 2005. Podrasky, who is more liberal, said she rooted for his nomination to be approved by the US Senate. 'He is family,' she said. Podrasky lives in San Francisco and usually sees Roberts only on family occasions. His mother is her godmother, whom she adores.

"She said Roberts knows she is gay and introduced her along with other relatives during his Senate confirmation hearing. She hopes he will meet her partner of four years ... during their Washington visit. The couple flew to Washington on Sunday. 'He is a smart man,' she said. 'He is a good man. I believe he sees where the tide is going. I do trust him. I absolutely trust that he will go in a good direction.'" So, you see, folks, the pressure is being brought to bear on these justices any way possible.

Now the chief justice is faced with, "What do I do if I rule against my cousin? What will they think of me if I don't rule in favor of my family?" This is what I mean about the blurring of media citizenry and the stage, the Supreme Court. (New Castrati impression) "Mr. Limbaugh, it's a democracy and people can petition the government to work any which way they wish!" Yes, they can. But what happens at the Supreme Court is not democratic. It's the law. It should be insulated analysis, constitutionality, what have you. It should be insulated from all these other things.

But, of course, it isn't and it has been for a long time.

There's a comparison here between this, gay marriage, and Roe v. Wade in one sense.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: You know, we had stories last week. I'm sure you'll recall. There are studies -- there are actually academic, scholarly studies -- being undertaken and the focus of the stories last week was the money being spent on this research, even though we find ourselves in a sequester. What was it, there was $2.5 million dollars spent to study why 75% of lesbians are obese and gay males aren't. Homosexual men aren't; lesbians are obese, 75%. Why? That cost two and a half mill. There's another survey, or another project, spent, I think, $1.5 million to find out why lesbians are alcoholics.

And, of course, the answers to the first case is they don't have to deal with men, so they don't have to worry about their appearance. They're not trying to please men. So they can be obese. It's no big deal. Alcohol, who knows? They're having to deal with women so they're drunk. Who knows? The bottom line is that if I were to now ask if any of that research is relevant in the case of the cousin of the chief justice, can you imagine the howls of protest I would get from people who do not know of these two studies that I would be bouncing off?

In other words, the context? So I can't ask whether chief justice's lesbian cousin is any of those things, because people would think I'm being mean. But I'll tell you what, seriously, on this Roe v. Wade versus this gay marriage business: One of the reasons why abortion so roils our culture is that it hasn't been democratically decided. The Supreme Court, nine people in black robes, just decided one day that abortion is in the Constitution, and that has led to constant acrimony.

If they do the same thing here... You know, if gay marriage in this country were voted on by the people, fine. Okay. That's it. But if nine guys in black robes decide that "marriage" can be defined as two people of the same sex, we're gonna have the same kind of roiling of our culture that abortion has given us. My preference would be that the court leave this alone, send it back to the people, and let the people decide it. You know, abortion's not a big deal in the UK for this very reason. They've decided it by votes of the people.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  No.  No, no, I'm telling you, you can't say that.  I can't tell you the number of times people tell me, "You can't say that."  After I've said it.  He-he-he-he-he.  Hell, even before, they said, "You can't say that."  And there's a bunch of stuff that you're not supposed to say.  I'll give you an example, this gay marriage business.  There's no question that the Supreme Court deciding the definition of marriage is gonna lead to another round of Roe v. Wade effects on our culture.

In the UK, United Kingdom, abortion does not cause anything like it causes in this country in terms of controversy and people being at war with each other, because it was decided by a vote of the people.  In this country, back in 1973, the Supreme Court, nine men in black robes said that they see the word "abortion" in the Constitution, and that women are entitled to one, and it's right there.  It's not there, but these nine guys, well, at least five of them said it is, and one of them wrote an opinion on it. It became the law of the land and it has led to strife and controversy that will never end.  And gay marriage, I think, is gonna do the same thing. 

If the Supreme Court once again does for gay marriage what it did for abortion, then we're gonna have never-ending cultural rift, strife, controversy over this, and it's gonna keep our culture and society ripped apart like abortion has.  Now, what you can't say in discussing this, if you advocate it being left up to a vote of the people, what you can't say is that every time the issue has been on a ballot it's lost.  Even in progressive California, Proposition 8 lost.  The proposition was to redefine the meaning of marriage to include people of the same sex.  That did not even pass in California.  So the Supreme Court is being asked to overturn that on the basis the people of California acted and voted unconstitutionally.

See, what you can't say is that if left up to a vote of the people, it won't become law, at least as we sit here today.  The vast majority of the people in this country oppose it, contrary to what you hear in the media, and if it were left to a vote of the people, it would be voted down.  But you can't say that.  And what you also can't say is that the reason it's at the Supreme Court is precisely because it would be voted down if put to a vote by the public at large.  And you also can't say that the Supreme Court is supposed to be insulated from the ebb and flow of popular culture movement and opinion.  You can't say that. So you can't say any of the stuff that I just said.  So I really didn't say it, 'cause you can't say it. 

If the Supreme Court goes ahead and finds that marriage can be whatever we want it to be, that it's not what we say it is now, I guarantee you it's gonna lead to the continued roiling of our culture and society as has happened with abortion, plain and simple.  You see, what you can't say is that the courts can't let the people decide because the people always decide the wrong way, always.  And that's why it has to be called a civil right.  'Cause if you call something a civil right, no matter how wildly unpopular it is, then that opposition is bigotry, and therefore bigotry can be ignored, but you can't say any of this, really.  So just be careful.  Don't try this on your own out there. 

But you can't say that the reason gay marriage is being portrayed as a civil right is because it allows opponents of it to be called bigots.  And what do you do with bigots?  You put them down. You ignore them. You make fun of them and you discredit what they believe.  So that's why it's a civil right.  You can't say any of this stuff.  That's why it's up for a vote, because the people would never do the right thing.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Folks, here's the deal.  Liberal policies are being imposed on the entire nation.  They are being imposed, and they are to be.  Those that haven't been, will be.  That's the deal.  Liberalism is being forced on the entire nation.  If they cannot achieve it by the vote, then they will achieve it by judicial fiat.  There is no saying "no" to the liberal agenda.  There is no "no."  You can say "no," but it's not gonna count.  If you don't want it, and if a majority of people don't want it, doesn't matter; it's going to be forced on you. 

The reason this matters, gay marriage, the reason homosexual marriage is before the Supreme Court is because the people of California voted "no," Proposition 8, they voted "no."  The courts, obviously run by the left, have said otherwise.  The other issue before the court is the Defense of Marriage Act.  That was passed by Congress and that was signed into law by President Clinton.  Whether by direct vote or through their representatives, in both instances the people said "no" to homosexual marriage. 

Now, the liberals are trying to force five or six justices to say "yes," and that's that.  And that's why it's being called a civil right.  You put civil right in front of any piece of legislation, and the odds are it'll pass because nobody's got the guts to vote "no" to a new civil right.  Civil rights in this country means one thing:  the end of discrimination based on race, usually, but now to include sexual orientation.  So you say that there is a civil right being denied when two people of the same sex can't get married, then what does that make the opponents?  It makes them bigots.  People that oppose civil rights are called bigots.  And what do you do with bigots?  You ignore them and you put them down. You impugn them, and you use them to advance your cause. 

I dare say that if somebody wanted to legalize... take something that you find reprehensible.  I don't know what it would be, but everybody opposes it.  Somebody could propose it and call it a civil right, and it might have a chance of becoming a law simply because of the power of those two words, "civil rights."  So same-sex marriage and wiping out the Defense of Marriage Act is now a civil right. People that oppose it are bigots and nobody wants to be a bigot.  But the thing you can't say is that if left to a vote of the people, same-sex marriage loses every time it's on the ballot.  I think so far it's 30 times.  State ballots, initiatives and other things, and the Defense of Marriage Act at the federal level.  It's never passed.  You wouldn't know that, would you, by listening to the pop culture media? 

You would think that this issue has overtaken everything, it's the most important issue to everybody and anybody, and that it has massive public support.  And yet every time it's been voted on by the people it has gone down to defeat.  That's why the courts have to get involved, because the people, according to the left, won't do the right thing.  And liberal policies are to be imposed on the nation.  It's the only way the country can become liberal is to have them imposed.  People would never vote for the stuff.  People never, ever vote for liberalism when that's what they know is ahead of them.  When they know that a candidate is liberal -- I'm talking about nationally -- when they know that a policy is liberal, when they know that a candidate is liberal, doesn't have a prayer, nationally. 

That's why it has to be imposed.  You don't say "no" to them.  There is no such thing as losing. There's no such thing as defeat.  The arena of ideas doesn't matter.  That's why they don't care to debate anything.  It doesn't matter.  Whether you oppose something or not, it doesn't matter.  It's gonna happen.  We're gonna impose our will and way of life on you, whether you like it or not.  We're not gonna waste time trying to change your heart.  We're not gonna waste time debating you and trying to change your mind.  We're gonna impose it on you.  And that's why we go to the courts, which is what's happening.  Which takes us to audio sound bite number 13.  This Week, ABC, roundtable discussion about gay marriage, Stephanopoulos talking to Karl Rove.  This goes by in seven seconds.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  Karl Rove, can you imagine the next presidential campaign a Republican candidate saying flat-out, "I am for gay marriage"?

ROVE:  I could.

RUSH:  Okay, Karl Rove says that he can imagine in 2016 a Republican candidate saying flat-out he's for gay marriage.  Now, I actually have one question.  If left up to a vote of the people, same-sex marriage loses.  So why would the Republican establishment be supporting it?  Maybe that's a question that I'm not supposed to ask.  But I'd like to know.  If the issue would lose, as it always has if left up to a vote of the people, then why are the Republicans for it?  If it's a losing issue, why not let the Democrats own it?  Well, we know the answer, because the Republicans think -- well, there's a whole lot of answers.  But the Republicans are in a totally defensive posture and they think that they're losing because they're not enough like Democrats, which means they're not considered cool and hip, in one sense. 

But it still is interesting, isn't it?  It would lose if put to a vote of the people, and yet the Republicans would support it.  You remember how Obama warned the Supreme Court they better not rule against the will of the people right before the Obamacare ruling?  He warned the Supreme Court they better not rule against the will of the people.  Well, he never had the will of the people.  The will of the people was never a majority in support of Obamacare, but that didn't matter.  He wanted to intimidate the court, and it appears that it worked in a couple of instances.  But wouldn't the Supreme Court be overturning the will of the people of California if they vote to overturn Proposition 8?  Another thing, folks, I'm not supposed to say or ask. 

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I could answer my question about the Republican Party and gay marriage even though it would lose to a vote of the public. The pressure is immense on Republicans to get hip with pop culture, including immigration reform, gun control, abortion, you name it.  Remember, folks, liberalism is to be imposed on this nation.  That's the goal.  That's their goal. That's their objective.  There aren't any votes.  There won't be any popular opinion about it.  It's gonna be imposed, unless people stand up and fight it.

END TRANSCRIPT

ADVERTISEMENT

Rush 24/7 Audio/Video

Listen to the Latest Show Watch the Latest Show

Facebook

ADVERTISEMENT

Most Popular

EIB Features

ADVERTISEMENT: