Ted Cruz Says SCOTUS 'Clearly Wrong' to Legalize Gay Marriage

[Redfish]

You do realize most of The Bible is just superstious fantasy-fiction don't you?

NOT to be taken literally.
Or even seriously.

I agree that much of the Bible can not be taken literally, but it is to be taken seriously. It is not fiction, but the word of God and his son Jesus. Ignore and ridicule it at your peril.

 

[postman]

Ted Cruz says Obergefell was 'wrong when it was decided' - Google Search

Ted Cruz Says SCOTUS 'Clearly Wrong' to Legalize Gay Marriage

"Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, ignored two centuries of our nation's history," the Republican senator said.

www.newsweek.com

-------------------------------------
I just knew it would come up soon.

The funny thing about ignoring two centuries of our nations history, would also mean throwing out the 13th and 14 amendments, going back to Plessy v Ferguson, and a "do over" n the civil war.

 

[rightwinger]

OK, Abortion remains legal. All the SC ruling said was that it is not a federal constitutional issue and that the voters of each state should decide whether to legalize it or not. If the polls you cite are correct then a majority of states will keep it legal----------so WTF is your issue?

The issue is Congress will try to pass a law making it illegal nationwide

 

[Stann]

Well you seem to think that the insane Roe decision being overturned is a bad thing, and you think that contract killing is a “medical treatment,” so I’m pretty sure no, you’re just fucking retarded.

No I'm just being practical. You bought into the hole emotional view of abortion. How sad is that.

 

[AsherN]

In this specific case (gay marriage) the Federal Government involving itself IMO is outside that framework and we would have been better off allowing the individual states to figure it out.

So what is the point of having a country if individual states can deny basic human rights? All citizens of a country should have the same rights wherever they live.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

No I'm just being practical. You bought into the hole emotional view of abortion. How sad is that.

No, I didn’t say anything emotional.

Contract killing shouldn’t be legal.

 

[Redfish]

The issue is Congress will try to pass a law making it illegal nationwide

Do you really think such a bill would pass? you are seeing ghosts that do not exist. Why do you libs fear the will of the voters in each state? Even if congress passed such a bill the recent SC ruling would make if null and void. Admit it, this whole abortion thing is about scaring people and getting them to vote for more libs in congress. you know that, I know that, everyone knows that. Its a political game, nothing more.

 

[Redfish]

There's no death penalty for homosexuals in the Koran.

maybe not, but muslims toss them off rooftops. Is that not a death penalty?

 

[Redfish]

So what is the point of having a country if individual states can deny basic human rights? All citizens of a country should have the same rights wherever they live.

only to the extent that such rights are enumerated in the constitution. Abortion is not in the constitution, neither is marriage in any form. Libs try to stretch "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" to include these but the SC has ruled against that.

 

[postman]

Do you really think such a bill would pass? you are seeing ghosts that do not exist. Why do you libs fear the will of the voters in each state? Even if congress passed such a bill the recent SC ruling would make if null and void.

Actually Dobbs said that the federal government could enact laws governing abortion. Either protecting it or outlawing it. They left it to the states, because congress dis not act.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

So what is the point of having a country if individual states can deny basic human rights? All citizens of a country should have the same rights wherever they live.

Anyone can claim anything is a “right,” but our United States Constitution does not declare many of these things you / others think of as “basic human rights” to be constitutional rights.

If the Constitution is silent on a topic, it is not the federal government’s authority to set nation-wide policy by fiat.

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

Actually Dobbs said that the federal government could enact laws governing abortion. Either protecting it or outlawing it. They left it to the states, because congress dis not act.

Such laws would be flagrantly unconstitutional.

 

[postman]

only to the extent that such rights are enumerated in the constitution. Abortion is not in the constitution, neither is marriage in any form. Libs try to stretch "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness" to include these but the SC has ruled against that.

Ninth Amendment

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Tenth Amendment

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

 

[rightwinger]

Do you really think such a bill would pass? you are seeing ghosts that do not exist. Why do you libs fear the will of the voters in each state? Even if congress passed such a bill the recent SC ruling would make if null and void. Admit it, this whole abortion thing is about scaring people and getting them to vote for more libs in congress. you know that, I know that, everyone knows that. Its a political game, nothing more.

I didn’t think SCOTUS would overturn Roe v Wade after swearing it was safe

Republicans are plotting long term
They are dangerous at all levels of Government

 

[Riff Raff]

The funny thing about ignoring two centuries of our nations history, would also mean throwing out the 13th and 14 amendments, going back to Plessy v Ferguson, and a "do over" n the civil war.

Some of America's biggest problems stem from the passage of the 13th and 14th amendments.

 

[rightwinger]

Some of America's biggest problems stem from the passage of the 13th and 14th amendments.

you are a moron

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

I didn’t think SCOTUS would overturn Roe v Wade after swearing it was safe

You are delusional if you think that ever happened.

 

[postman]

Such laws would be flagrantly unconstitutional.

How so? They come under the "general welfare" clause.
It's no different than congress passing a law against murder. That's not enumerated in the constitution either.

 

[postman]

Some of America's biggest problems stem from the passage of the 13th and 14th amendments.

They were what made us a "more perfect" union.

 

[postman]

You are delusional if you think that ever happened.

Actually every republican coming up for confirmation in the senate swore up and down that Roe v Wade was precedent, settled law, and they believed in stare decisis