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

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Lol, I guess we'll have to just wait and see. I'm pretty sure you're safe

Over 80 religious, conservative groups urge Senate to oppose gay marriage bill

Leaders representing more than 80 religious and conservative groups have sent a letter to U S Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in an attempt to convince Republicans to vote against the Respect

www.christianpost.com

 

[CarsomyrPlusSix]

PS To clarify: Children are sexually exploited but not by those whio you imply are doing it. It is not Democrats, educators or librarians,. It is the likes of The Matt Gaetz Investigation: What We Know (Published 2021).

CC: Delldude

Imagine parroting debunked defamatory claims like this one.

For shame.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

These 157 House Republicans Voted Against Protections For Same-Sex Marriage

House legislation codifying protections for gay marriage passed despite the fact that a big majority of the House Republican caucus opposed it.

www.huffpost.com

Here are the names of every Republican representative who opposed federal protections for gay marriage:

The Most Anti-Gay US Politicians

Who are the most anti-gay US politicians? The list is a long one, including politicians from both parties (though a majority are Republican). The politicians listed here have spoken out vocally against gay rights, most notably gay marriage. Anti-gay politicians are the elected leaders whose...

www.ranker.com

Good for them. And shame on the pervert-loving filth who have supported this disgusting mockery of marriage.

 

[ThisIsMe]

No

Well , well, 24 hours and no response. Good! You are finished here .

No, I just had other things to do.

But, at the expense of just rehashing all this over and over, what's the point? I simply disagree with you, I don't believe states will return to banning gay marriage, you do. So....where would you like to go?

 

[ThisIsMe]

This time. Kim Davis did not have standing. Next time it may well be different. What the **** is wrong with you??

Nah, the 2 that dissented actually sided with those who rejected it, for "technical" reasons, or whatever. Point is, even if they had dissented completely, it still would have been rejected because the rest of the court didn't agree.

Nothing is wrong with me...what is wrong with you? Why do you want to keep living in this world of fear?

 

[ThisIsMe]

I'm safe? What the **** are you talking about? What is it that you think that you know about me?

What is it that you think that you know about me?

I meant your safe in that, you don't have to worry about states banning gay marriage in the future.

 

[ThisIsMe]

IN the news today:

GOP governor suggests it’s ‘common sense’ to ban same-sex marriage because it ‘ought to be reserved’ for a man and woman

South Carolina Republican Governor Henry McMaster, seeking re-election to a second full term, denigrated the marriages of same-sex couples in a debate Wednesday and said if the U.S. Supreme Court were to overturn its 2015 ruling that found a constitutional right for same-sex couples to marry, he...

www.rawstory.com

So, he didn't say he would ban gay marriage, he said that CURRENT law bans gay marriage, and he would follow the law WHATEVER IT IS. so that means if the state repeals the gay marriage ban, he will follow that law. But, again, good luck finding anyone that will actually enforce it.

So, get back to me IF obergefell is ever repealed, AND if you see states start refusing gay marriage, then I will admit I was wrong.

 

[ThisIsMe]

These 157 House Republicans Voted Against Protections For Same-Sex Marriage

House legislation codifying protections for gay marriage passed despite the fact that a big majority of the House Republican caucus opposed it.

www.huffpost.com

Here are the names of every Republican representative who opposed federal protections for gay marriage:

I'm not going to go back and watch the speeches of each of those senators to find out why they voted it down, but I'll take a guess that it was because the bill is written to overrule states rights.

Rubio said this: "it is unnecessary, there are other priorities, and this is an issue he’s always believed should be handled by the states."

And Cruz said this: "The way the Constitution set up for you to advance that position is convince your fellow citizens that if you succeeded in convincing your fellow citizens, then your state would change the laws to reflect those views. In Obergefell, the court said, 'No, we know better than you guys do, and now every state must, must sanction and permit gay marriage,'” Cruz continued"

So, I'm sure you have all the links, did any of those that voted against it say they did so because they didn't think gay marriage should be legal, at all, or did they all cite states rights?

Look, I'm not denying that there ARE people against gay marriage, I don't think they will prevail in their efforts.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Over 80 religious, conservative groups urge Senate to oppose gay marriage bill

Leaders representing more than 80 religious and conservative groups have sent a letter to U S Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell in an attempt to convince Republicans to vote against the Respect

www.christianpost.com

Well yeah.....I'm sure they urge the senate to do a lot of things. Christians don't believe in gay marriage....that's not new.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

No

No, I just had other things to do.

But, at the expense of just rehashing all this over and over, what's the point? I simply disagree with you, I don't believe states will return to banning gay marriage, you do. So....where would you like to go?

Keep reading fool!

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Nah, the 2 that dissented actually sided with those who rejected it, for "technical" reasons, or whatever. Point is, even if they had dissented completely, it still would have been rejected because the rest of the court didn't agree.

Nothing is wrong with me...what is wrong with you? Why do you want to keep living in this world of fear?

Holy ******* shit! Do you not understand that if they found that the plaintif had standing, there would have been a good chance that tree more Justices would have agreed with Thomas and Scalia-and that was before Barrot was on the court. The world is a fearsome place

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

So, he didn't say he would ban gay marriage, he said that CURRENT law bans gay marriage, and he would follow the law WHATEVER IT IS. so that means if the state repeals the gay marriage ban, he will follow that law. But, again, good luck finding anyone that will actually enforce it.

So, get back to me IF obergefell is ever repealed, AND if you see states start refusing gay marriage, then I will admit I was wrong.

Give it a ******* rest. You know damned well what would happen if Obgefell were to be overturned. Once again, I am not sure if you are just playing a sick game or if you are really just that stupid

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

I'm not going to go back and watch the speeches of each of those senators to find out why they voted it down, but I'll take a guess that it was because the bill is written to overrule states rights.

Rubio said this: "it is unnecessary, there are other priorities, and this is an issue he’s always believed should be handled by the states."

And Cruz said this: "The way the Constitution set up for you to advance that position is convince your fellow citizens that if you succeeded in convincing your fellow citizens, then your state would change the laws to reflect those views. In Obergefell, the court said, 'No, we know better than you guys do, and now every state must, must sanction and permit gay marriage,'” Cruz continued"

So, I'm sure you have all the links, did any of those that voted against it say they did so because they didn't think gay marriage should be legal, at all, or did they all cite states rights?

Look, I'm not denying that there ARE people against gay marriage, I don't think they will prevail in their efforts.

Yes, yes. You keep bleating about states rights while ignoring individual righs to due process and equal protection under that law. More and more, it is becomming apparent that you are full of shit when you claim to support gay rights and marriage equality. And, it hardly matters why they voted against the bill, the fact is that you and they are cut from the same mold

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Well yeah.....I'm sure they urge the senate to do a lot of things. Christians don't believe in gay marriage....that's not new.

Wrong. All Christians are not bigots

 

[ThisIsMe]

Keep reading fool!

Read...what?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Holy ******* shit! Do you not understand that if they found that the plaintif had standing, there would have been a good chance that tree more Justices would have agreed with Thomas and Scalia-and that was before Barrot was on the court. The world is a fearsome place

But she didn't have standing..I mean, sure we could "what if" this all day, they found she didn't have standing and they all rejected it. The system worked.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Give it a ******* rest. You know damned well what would happen if Obgefell were to be overturned. Once again, I am not sure if you are just playing a sick game or if you are really just that stupid

You're right, I don't KNOW what would happen, and neither do you. I just don't believe it will ever happen.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Yes, yes. You keep bleating about states rights while ignoring individual righs to due process and equal protection under that law. More and more, it is becomming apparent that you are full of shit when you claim to support gay rights and marriage equality. And, it hardly matters why they voted against the bill, the fact is that you and they are cut from the same mold

I am for the cotus and adherence to it. I don't believe that the federal government has the right to make laws for or against gay marriage. Those rights are for the states, and the people more than they are for the federal gov. I believe that freedom means you should have the right to love and marry whomever you want and that no laws against it should be made.on religious grounds, because freedom OF religion also includes freedom FROM religion.

I don't agree that states should outlaw gay marriage, and I don't think they will, but that is for the people of that state to decide, and if necessary, take to scotus on a 14A basis. I believe if the people of the state decide they want gay marriage to be legal, they should make sure their elected officials vote that way.

I just simply do not believe that the federal gov has the right to make laws about this, and I think scotus shouldn't make rulings on a general basis because of what you all did to roe. I'm sorry, the courts do not make law, that is not their job. Yes, they can protect people's rights, and I'm for that.

I just disagree with your assertion that the courts can make laws, and that the federal gov has the right to run roughshod over states rights.

I've asked this before, and I don't know if I ever got an answer, bit, what does stated rights mean to you? How do you view the relationship of the power of the state vs power of the federal gov?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Wrong. All Christians are not bigots

You are correct, my point should have been, there will be Christians out there who will do things like that. It's not a new concept.

 

[San Souci]

Only a matter of time before the TRUMP court strikes down same sex marriage

The only question is will they just overrule it or start by allowing business to deny service for “religious reasons”

Good. It is lefty filth.