State laws to withhold funds for same-sex 'marriage'

Teddy Pollins

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2015
Messages
348
Reaction score
41
Points
48
The controversy over same-sex “marriage” is white-hot, with the Alabama Supreme Court’s showdown with a federal judge and the case to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court, including two justices who have officiated at same-sex ceremonies.
But now some states say that regardless of what federal courts decide, they will have nothing to do with same-sex marriage unless it’s handled by the federal government itself.
Lawmakers in Texas, South Carolina and Oklahoma have introduced proposals that prohibit the use of taxpayer funds “related to the licensing and support of same-sex marriage.”
And there’s an enforcement mechanism: “If an employee violates this subsection, the employee may not continue to receive a salary, pension, or other employee benefit at the expense of the taxpayers of this state.”
The move has been highlighted by Mass Resistance, a Massachusetts-based organization that long has fought on behalf of traditional marriage.
The movement takes advantage of the concept of dual sovereignty, which holds that Washington cannot force a state to take an action. That’s why decades ago the imposition of the nationwide 55 mph speech limit was tied to the distribution of highway funds.

State laws to withhold funds for same-sex marriage
Why do we still have citizens and politicians who do not support gays and their wish to be married?
Why America is still homophobic?
I can explain: Because we are living in a traditional country where gays are sexual minority.
Discriminating LGBT movement is far-going process...
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,462
Points
2,165
Federal law trumps state law on civil rights

End of story.
 

Book of Jeremiah

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
37,635
Reaction score
4,510
Points
1,170
Isn't this you?

are there any reason to have high taxes US Message Board - Political Discussion


I am preparing a project in my high school about debating and I hope that my "fellow socialists" can help me. My team is supposed to debate whether or not to have high taxes and I need all the reasons I can get. According to the rule of our interactive game: I am living in Sweden and we have very high taxes(it seems to be true), some of the highest taxes in the world. It pays off through free medical care, great schools etc. I understand the basics, of course. I just need MORE reasons to prove it to the other groups.
Another question do we have high taxes in America? (If not) do we need them? And why?
Do you like paying a lot for the common needs?
I need more ideas.
Thanks a lot.

____________
You stated in a thread earlier you are in your mid thirties - are you a high school student or a teacher? Just curious.
 

thereisnospoon

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2010
Messages
29,821
Reaction score
3,026
Points
280
Location
mid south
Federal law trumps state law on civil rights

End of story.
You are missing the point....
These states are in effect deferring to the federal government to perform and fund the costs of same sex marriage.
And you are incorrect....For example. Federal Law prohibits wagers from being taken on professional and amateur sporting contests....
Four states say it is legal....
The use and sale of marijuana is a violation of federal law. Yet several states have legalized the use and sale of pot for medical and recreational use.
Federal law bans polygamy. The possibility exists that polygamy may become legal in Utah again...
Federal law bans prostitution.....Nevada law permits it...
Back to gambling.....Federal law prohibits the use of wires or cables to transmit wagers or any financial transaction related to gaming. Several states permit this.
Now. What else would you like to discuss?
 
Last edited:

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,462
Points
2,165
Sigh. Gambling, marijuana, polygamy, prostitution, etc, are not civil rights. You have no constitutional protection to do any of them.

We are talking about what is going to become marriage equality for all citizens, a civil right. The point is that if the state provides marriage services, it must be provided to all citizens equally.

The state could get out of the marrying business all together, other than registration, etc.
.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top