Page 7 of 46 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 456

Thread: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

  1. #61
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    Add Jindal to the list
    Jindal won't 'evolve' on same-sex marriage - CNN.com

    he wants a constitutional amendment in favor of bans lol, does he also plan on removing the 14th? lol
    If some of these Right Wing nut jobs like ALSC Justice Roy Moore had their way, that's exactly what they'd do! He gave a heated interview on CNN recently where he flat out said he wouldn't have supported the SCOUS' ruling on Dred Scott nor Brown -vs- Board of Education which overturned Plessy -vs- Ferguson. While I get his state's rights arguments, I totally disagree with him on moral grounds, on principle and from a federal constitutional standpoint.
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  2. #62
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by voyager1 View Post
    The whole hallmark of marriage is consent though. I don't think that will ever go away.
    True.

  3. #63
    Guru
    Hamster Buddha's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 06:10 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,675

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    If some of these Right Wing nut jobs like ALSC Justice Roy Moore had their way, that's exactly what they'd do! He gave a heated interview on CNN recently where he flat out said he wouldn't have supported the SCOUS' ruling on Dred Scott nor Brown -vs- Board of Education which overturned Plessy -vs- Ferguson. While I get his state's rights arguments, I totally disagree with him on moral grounds, on principle and from a federal constitutional standpoint.
    There not nut jobs, unless one of these guys comes out and tells me that he wouldn't go to a restaurant that serves black, then all you can you accuse him over is being an advocate of states rights. I'm not saying states rights is "right" but what I am saying is that just because he believes that, doesn't mean he's racist.

  4. #64
    Guru
    1750Texan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Southcental Texas
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,569

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Butchering of English grammar aside, I'm actually semi-okay with this and here's why: essentially what he is arguing for is to protect a state's ability choose if it wants to allow SSM in the state or not. Mainly because the way the electorate is going anyways, even if said bill was passed, eventually every state will legalize SSM anyways.
    He can argue till Kingdom come...but when the courts rule that a state does not have the right to ban marriage based on sexual orientation...a federal law will not trump that ruling.

    By the time Cruz gets this legislation passed [when Hell freezes over]...the legislation would be moot.

    And if a miracle should happen and the SC rules states do have the right to ban SSM...then one more time...Cruz' legislation would be rendered moot.


  5. #65
    Sage

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Huntsville, AL (USA)
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:51 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    9,763

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    It could be that they are standing up for their sincere belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
    Although not addressed to me, I'll take the issue on.

    I understand this state's rights argument, but here's the rub.

    Even when federal law goes against our innate values of "freedom of choice, freedom of religion (even if it means you're an atheist), the pursuit of happiness and equal protection" as certain aspects of the DOMA clearly does, you have to take a step back and look at those state laws that trample over these same values. The biggest issue here w/SSM is equal protection mainly because simple things like hospital visits or living wills as agreed upon by homosexual partners are being denied. Moreover, when you look at the division of property rights or death benefits for same-sex couples, even federal law denies these such benefits. So, there are clear areas that need to be cleaned up where state and federal laws converge on the SSM issue. In some cases, changing "spouse" to "beneficiary" would go a long way to mitigating alot of the nuance. But in other situation, such as inheritance and property rights, the issues aren't so clear.

    For the record, I'm a Christian and I do believe that homosexuality is a sin. But as two saying go: "Hate the sin, not the sinner," and "You can't legislate morality."
    "A fair exchange ain't no robbery." Tupac Shakur w/Digital Underground

  6. #66
    Guru
    1750Texan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Southcental Texas
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,569

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    It could be that they are standing up for their sincere belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
    I to believe that marriage is between one man and one woman...What does that have to do with the Constitution? When did America become a Sharia law nation in which religious beliefs trump the US Constitution.


  7. #67
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Butchering of English grammar aside, I'm actually semi-okay with this and here's why: essentially what he is arguing for is to protect a state's ability choose if it wants to allow SSM in the state or not. Mainly because the way the electorate is going anyways, even if said bill was passed, eventually every state will legalize SSM anyways.
    Why exactly should any American have to wait for "eventually" to exercise their constitutionally protected right to marry?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    And there are serious legal issues raises when you try to extend the 14th amendment to protect legal agreements (which is really what SSM is all about).
    It protects marriage. It has for decades.

    It opens up the doors for all sorts of other issues like incest and polygamy.
    No, it doesn't. Those are completely separate issues. Just like interracial marriage didn't lead to incest, same sex marriage doesn't either.

    I'm not saying that loving someone of the same sex is a choice, but to enter into a legal agreement that says such is. See the difference?
    And you have no right to deny others the choice to enter into that agreement.

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    It could be that they are standing up for their sincere belief that marriage is between one man and one woman.
    Laws aren't based on beliefs. Constitutional rights aren't stripped from people because of someone's belief.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    The reason it wouldn't apply to women or race is because you are judging them based solely on who they, not what their doing.
    That is not at all how this body of law works, and the discrimination against gays is entirely about who they are. The same way that keeping black children out of specific schools isn't "what they are doing", keeping gay couples out of marriage isn't. It isn't the driving that's being discriminated against when someone is harassed and arrested for "driving while black."

    You feel, and I think many on our side erroneously think so as well, that many of those who oppose SSM do so because they simply hate gays.
    A lot of you seem to. The loudest voices in the anti-rights movement express a lot of hatred. Some of the rest of you dress it up in slippery slopes and fallaceous arguments about separation of powers and "the will of the people."

    What they fear most is what will happen when you start assigning equal rights to legal arrangements and that's all that marriage (straight or gay) is. Once you start assigning those protections to legal arrangements, then you start to move into the territory where stuff like polygamy can be recognized under the law and offered the same treatment as other marriages.
    That is all that marriage is. That's all marriage has ever been. You can assign your marriage whatever other things you want. You can feel that it has religious significance or whatever emotional status you like. That's personal and has nothing to do with the law.

    Meanwhile, if you're so afraid of polygamy, make arguments against that, not against same sex marriage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Because really, the only reason we don't allow Polygamy today is because it's a social taboo, as was SSM for the longest time. Once you remove the taboo, you realize there's nothing to stop extending legal protections to them.
    So then why are you so afraid of legal polygamy?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Let me sum this up because I'm not going to go over the same points again:

    You have a right to be Gay in the US, you do not have the right to Gay Marriage.
    No, you have a right to be gay, and the right to marry. Therefore, you have the right to a same sex marriage.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hamster Buddha View Post
    Strange definition of Liberal. But regardless, honestly the government shouldn't be in the position of defining marriage in the first place.
    Then who should? Churches? You do know that many Americans aren't Christians and have no desire to be. All religious institutions? Many Americans aren't religious, and religion has no place in law. So tell me, who defines marriage if not the law?

    Again though, it's really not about discriminating gays as it is preventing a slippery slope where other doors are then opened.
    Bull. You can repeat this over and over and it will never become true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cephus View Post
    Because nobody voted for Republicans, they voted against Democrats.
    And because barely anyone showed up to vote at all.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  8. #68
    I'm kind of a big deal

    AGENT J's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,787

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by Objective Voice View Post
    If some of these Right Wing nut jobs like ALSC Justice Roy Moore had their way, that's exactly what they'd do! He gave a heated interview on CNN recently where he flat out said he wouldn't have supported the SCOUS' ruling on Dred Scott nor Brown -vs- Board of Education which overturned Plessy -vs- Ferguson. While I get his state's rights arguments, I totally disagree with him on moral grounds, on principle and from a federal constitutional standpoint.
    well theres extremists everywhere thats for sure and I support states rights also I just simply understand what they actually are unlike some of these other people. State doesnt trump the Constitution or individual rights
    This space is currently owned by The Great Winchester, stay tuned for future messages!
    Make America Great Again!
    Pro-Equal Rights / Pro-Gun Rights / Pro-Human Rights / Pro-Choice

  9. #69
    Guru
    sawdust's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Last Seen
    03-04-16 @ 09:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    3,177

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by AGENT J View Post
    Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage - CNN.com



    wow what a waste of time and money, also nothing like making sure you wont be president either lol Equal rights is coming bigots . .. give it up

    again im not saying this one topic SHOULD decide who could be president but any candidate that comes out against equal rights and they make it "PART OF THEIR CAMPAIGN AND RUNNING PLATFORM" is sure to lose lol

    its just the way politics will be in 2016

    lastly traditional marriage is in no danger by equal rights, its a made up subjective thing, it wont be impacted at all

    next "the obama administration forcing it"? It doesnt get any dumber than that.

    good lord
    the war is over but its entertaining seeing the last desperate attempts of bigotry, it shows peoples true colors
    Regulation of marriage is not a Federal responsibility constitutionally. I don't oppose gay marriage but the authority to regulate it belongs with the states. Gay marriage is also not the leading problem of our day and too much time is wasted on it.
    "A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury." Attributed to Alexander Tytler

  10. #70
    Guru
    1750Texan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Southcental Texas
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 02:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    3,569

    Re: Cruz introduces bill defending states' rights on marriage

    Quote Originally Posted by sawdust View Post
    Regulation of marriage is not a Federal responsibility constitutionally. I don't oppose gay marriage but the authority to regulate it belongs with the states. Gay marriage is also not the leading problem of our day and too much time is wasted on it.
    Correct, states do have the historical authority to regulate marriage...just as they do not have a constitutional authority to violate the rights of their residents in that regulation.


Page 7 of 46 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •