• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

TN politician and FRC lawyer try to use SSM to creat chaos in the state

chromium

chromium

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 6, 2013
Messages
16,968
Reaction score
3,770
Location
A2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Some might've heard of the Tennessee politician who pushed a bill to ignore the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. If passed, the fed could've forced compliance in various ways, but for certain the state would've lost $8.5 BILLION in federal funds - medicaid etc. It came to a vote anyway, and was defeated

Sponsor of Tennessee's anti-gay marriage bill is undaunted by potential $8.5 billion cost | Times Free Press

Now a lawyer for the hate group FRC has suggested the south could've dodged enforcement of Brown vs Board by eliminating public education. Along those lines, he believes now it should eliminate marriage altogether and is suing (which he hopes the same Supreme Court will side with him on) to make this happen, just so gay couples can't marry. That's how much he despises equality

Anti-Gay Marriage Attorney Wonders Why States Didn't Use His Strategy to Fight Desegregation - Towleroad

"Fowler’s lawsuit rests on his theory that because the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Tennessee’s same-sex marriage ban in Obergefell v. Hodges, the state’s entire marriage statute is invalid, so no one can get married in Tennessee unless and until the Legislature passes a new one."

Unlike the first failed bill, some republicans are publicly supporting this lawsuit

Is anyone surprised to see this tactic? Any chance it will succeed? Do southerners just hate lgbt so much they'd rather see their own marriage annulled, or is the FRC just a band of extremists who don't speak for them?

Also, which southern or midwest state will be the next to soil itself over this issue? Kentucky had kim davis, alabama had its chief justice, indiana had "RFRA", texas had ted cruz...
 
The phrase, "cutting off your nose to spite your face" comes to mind. It's actually kind of funny. For all the contorted arguments that, some how, gay marriage would harm hetero marriage, it turns out it's the SSM opponents that are the ones making that the case.
 
chromium said:
Some might've heard of the Tennessee politician who pushed a bill to ignore the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. If passed, the fed could've forced compliance in various ways, but for certain the state would've lost $8.5 BILLION in federal funds - medicaid etc. It came to a vote anyway, and was defeated

Sponsor of Tennessee's anti-gay marriage bill is undaunted by potential $8.5 billion cost | Times Free Press

Now a lawyer for the hate group FRC has suggested the south could've dodged enforcement of Brown vs Board by eliminating public education. Along those lines, he believes now it should eliminate marriage altogether and is suing (which he hopes the same Supreme Court will side with him on) to make this happen, just so gay couples can't marry. That's how much he despises equality

Anti-Gay Marriage Attorney Wonders Why States Didn't Use His Strategy to Fight Desegregation - Towleroad

"Fowler’s lawsuit rests on his theory that because the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Tennessee’s same-sex marriage ban in Obergefell v. Hodges, the state’s entire marriage statute is invalid, so no one can get married in Tennessee unless and until the Legislature passes a new one."

Unlike the first failed bill, some republicans are publicly supporting this lawsuit

Is anyone surprised to see this tactic? Any chance it will succeed? Do southerners just hate lgbt so much they'd rather see their own marriage annulled, or is the FRC just a band of extremists who don't speak for them?

Also, which southern or midwest state will be the next to soil itself over this issue? Kentucky had kim davis, alabama had its chief justice, indiana had "RFRA", texas had ted cruz...
Click to expand...

The fact that that bill failed shows how cowardly the TN legislators are. And all you'd need to do for the state to avoid the fed's force is ensure that the protective details for the governor and other top state officials understand to prevent any marshals from carrying out an arrest warrant, and to withdraw all state money from federally controlled institutions.
 
chromium said:
Some might've heard of the Tennessee politician who pushed a bill to ignore the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. If passed, the fed could've forced compliance in various ways, but for certain the state would've lost $8.5 BILLION in federal funds - medicaid etc. It came to a vote anyway, and was defeated

Sponsor of Tennessee's anti-gay marriage bill is undaunted by potential $8.5 billion cost | Times Free Press

Now a lawyer for the hate group FRC has suggested the south could've dodged enforcement of Brown vs Board by eliminating public education. Along those lines, he believes now it should eliminate marriage altogether and is suing (which he hopes the same Supreme Court will side with him on) to make this happen, just so gay couples can't marry. That's how much he despises equality

Anti-Gay Marriage Attorney Wonders Why States Didn't Use His Strategy to Fight Desegregation - Towleroad

"Fowler’s lawsuit rests on his theory that because the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Tennessee’s same-sex marriage ban in Obergefell v. Hodges, the state’s entire marriage statute is invalid, so no one can get married in Tennessee unless and until the Legislature passes a new one."

Unlike the first failed bill, some republicans are publicly supporting this lawsuit

Is anyone surprised to see this tactic? Any chance it will succeed? Do southerners just hate lgbt so much they'd rather see their own marriage annulled, or is the FRC just a band of extremists who don't speak for them?

Also, which southern or midwest state will be the next to soil itself over this issue? Kentucky had kim davis, alabama had its chief justice, indiana had "RFRA", texas had ted cruz...
Click to expand...

The swan song.
 
X Factor said:
The phrase, "cutting off your nose to spite your face" comes to mind. It's actually kind of funny. For all the contorted arguments that, some how, gay marriage would harm hetero marriage, it turns out it's the SSM opponents that are the ones making that the case.
Click to expand...

This just made me realize that probably at least 98% of those who would be harmed by these tactics are heterosexual. It seriously makes no sense.

Unlike education, there's just no religious immunity approach that can even come close to the government benefits of marriage. A church can't dictate who gets to marry and immigrate, who gets to claim spousal privilege in court testimony, who gets to file joint tax returns. I can't imagine what this lawyer thinks he'll accomplish
 
chromium said:
This just made me realize that probably at least 98% of those who would be harmed by these tactics are heterosexual. It seriously makes no sense.

Unlike education, there's just no religious immunity approach that can even come close to the government benefits of marriage. A church can't dictate who gets to marry and immigrate, who gets to claim spousal privilege in court testimony, who gets to file joint tax returns. I can't imagine what this lawyer thinks he'll accomplish
Click to expand...

If he is bringing a legitimate argument to the supreme court, we may actually see laws forbidding people from suing churches and other 501c charities for not performing same sex marriages.

That would be a ruling I wouldn't disagree with. I doubt any of this it's legitimate and I doubt that is the end game.
 
For all that I disagree with it, I have note that the one legitimate method that states had was to not issues marriage licenses to begin with. Then there is no discrimination. Now with that they would not be allowed to dismiss any marriage from any other state, via that one amendment whose number is escaping ATM. But that is as close as it gets. The only other possibility they might get have is to treat marriage licenses the same as drivers license and require that you get one from them if you become a resident of their state. While it has never been treated historically as such, I am not aware of any legal precedent that would prevent such a change. But I really don't see how that would get them around the discrimination part.
 
They were right. Same-sex marriage is going to destroy marriage. Because the people who oppose it will make it happen by whatever means necessary.
 
maquiscat said:
For all that I disagree with it, I have note that the one legitimate method that states had was to not issues marriage licenses to begin with. Then there is no discrimination. Now with that they would not be allowed to dismiss any marriage from any other state, via that one amendment whose number is escaping ATM. But that is as close as it gets. The only other possibility they might get have is to treat marriage licenses the same as drivers license and require that you get one from them if you become a resident of their state. While it has never been treated historically as such, I am not aware of any legal precedent that would prevent such a change. But I really don't see how that would get them around the discrimination part.
Click to expand...

Full Faith and Credit Clause. And arguably, no, it would not force a state to recognize marriages from other states if it abolished marriage law.
 
I'm 100% behind removing government from marriage, but not for the reasons these ****s are talking about.

Sigh. Sometimes a good cause gets hijacked by assholes. I suppose there is nothing you can do about that, but it still sucks.
 
Henrin said:
I'm 100% behind removing government from marriage, but not for the reasons these ****s are talking about.

Sigh. Sometimes a good cause gets hijacked by assholes. I suppose there is nothing you can do about that, but it still sucks.
Click to expand...
They aren't for removing marriage from government. They are out to destroy it so they can blame inclusion for it.

I don't think government has any business in marriage, that being said they aren't ever going to stop ruling over it. government is like prostate cancer it only gets bigger and bigger.
 
chromium said:
This just made me realize that probably at least 98% of those who would be harmed by these tactics are heterosexual. It seriously makes no sense.

Unlike education, there's just no religious immunity approach that can even come close to the government benefits of marriage. A church can't dictate who gets to marry and immigrate, who gets to claim spousal privilege in court testimony, who gets to file joint tax returns. I can't imagine what this lawyer thinks he'll accomplish
Click to expand...

Spite, my friend. That's all this is. It's like holding a hot coal in your hand expecting it to hurt someone else.
 
Henrin said:
I'm 100% behind removing government from marriage, but not for the reasons these ****s are talking about.

Sigh. Sometimes a good cause gets hijacked by assholes. I suppose there is nothing you can do about that, but it still sucks.
Click to expand...

I still can't figure out why you want to eliminate government recognition of marriage. Do you want hospitals to be able to kick out your partner? Who will be your automatic medical power of attorney? Inheritance? Child custody after adoption? How do any of these things, and hundreds of other things, work if there's no official way to designate someone as your spouse? Every single couple has to hire a lawyer to draw up the numerous documents?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom