Rights, such as those granted in the Bill of Rights, are tradionally viewed as inalienable rights, or God-given rights.  The Supreme Court's decision last month to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, which defines marriage at the Federal level as being only between and man and a woman (who would think that would ever be controversial?), and to allow a lower courts overturning of the people of Califonia's decision to define marriage as only between a man and a woman is a low water mark for the Supreme Court.  Shame on the Suprem Court to use the court as a bully pulpit for homosexual activists.

The greatest irony that I see is the almost unspoken of fact that some 46% of homosexual men report having been seuxally molested, versus only 7% of heterosexual men:

In research with 942 nonclinical adult participants, gay men and lesbian women reported a significantly higher rate of childhood molestation than did heterosexual men and women. Forty-six percent of the homosexual men in contrast to 7% of the heterosexual men reported homosexual molestation. Twenty-two percent of lesbian women in contrast to 1% of heterosexual women reported homosexual molestation. Archives of Sexual Behavior as referenced at conservopedia.com.

  So, a strong indicator for same sex attraction is sexual molestation.  But instead of attacking and eliminating arguably the greatest cause of same sex attraction (sexual molestation), we say, "let's make 'marriage' a 'right' for those who have become same sex attracted", arguably largely becasue of sexaul abuse occuring during childhood or adolescence. This is crazy.  We should be outraged at the abuse of vulnerable children and youth, yet instead we normalize the resultant aberrant behavior.  And now California wants to criminalze therapy that helps those who want to change their sexual orientation.

Let's focus on the cause of same sex attraction and stop normalizing it and pushing it on our children.  And speaking of rights, what about the rights of those childen adopted by same sex couples?  Who asked the children if that is what they wanted?  Speak up and speak out.  Love is defined biologically by nature, and nothing can change that.  Marriage is defined by the sexual union of a man and a woman in an excluive relationship that is at its core.  The Supreme Court can rule whatever it wants, but that will not change how men and women are created.  I hope that the Suprem Court returns to defending inalienable rights and eschews creating new "rights" based on dubious legal premises.