Posted on 03/27/2013 7:44:30 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Sen. Ted Cruz said Tuesday that he was against same sex marriage and hoped the U.S. Supreme Court would continue to let individual states grapple with the issue. “I support traditional marriage between one man and one woman,” Cruz said after speaking to the Richardson Chamber of Commerce. “The Constitution leaves it to the states to decide upon marriage and I hope the Supreme Court respects centuries of tradition and doesn’t step into the process of setting aside state laws that make the definition of marriage.”
Currently federal law defines marriage and the union of a man and a woman. But the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments today on California’s ban on same-sex marriage. And on Wednesday the high court will take up the federal Defense of Marriage Act, the Bill Clinton-era law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman.
Polls show that over the decades more Americans, including Republicans, are beginning to support the concept of same-sex marriage.
Cruz, a Republican from Houston, has captivated conservative and tea party followers with his aggressive support of principles involving state’s rights, smaller government and the Constitutional rights of individual Americans.
At the Richardson Chamber luncheon, he said he was against efforts in Congress to mandate additional background checks on gun buyers.
“We will oppose moving to proceed on any bill that strips Second Amendment rights for law abiding citizens,” Cruz said.
(Excerpt) Read more at trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com ...
What is left is federal marital status since states have differing laws. There is conflict between DOMA and states that allow gay marriage. That conflict has to be dealt with and fed rules established on how to classify couples for tax and benefit purposes.
The reason why the Left is pushing this is to further weaken the family. Legal “marriage” will remove the natural law principle from any legal opposition to homosexuality.
Legal prohibitions against the adoption of children by homosexuals will be eliminated, and homosexuality will suffuse government school curricula, right down to kindergarten. Any opposition to homosexuality will become “hate speech” and “hate crimes.”
Gay Marriage and Abortion are alike, in that if left up to the States, North Dakota would outlaw them both and California would mandate them both.
;-)
Question - do they still require that and if so,
**************
Google is your friend sometimes.
http://usmarriagelaws.com/search/united_states/blood_test_requirements/
Gays I have no idea....
Exactly right.
Everyone know what a marriage is, and that two people of the same sex cannot constitute a marriage. All this nonsense about “whether they should be permitted to” is nothing but an end-run around the issue of their disgusting and wicked practices.
1. It will make your culture more dangerous.
2. The state has no interest in your love life.
3. The state has an interest in the potentially procreative unit....mother/father bonded with and rearing the child.
4. Children have a right to their own father and mother.
For another person (or group of people) it would be their Muslim Iman, or Bishop Romney, or the priest of the gay goat church, for the atheist it would be himself and the others involved.
Which state marriage definition would Cruz have the feds recognize for the military, and immigration, and all the other federal situations involving marriage?
How about when the couple moves to another state?
There were even comments from the bench yesterday indicating some thinking that this should be an issue to be decided by the states.
That gives some hope that SCOTUS might overturn the 9th Circuit Court’s action to overturn the citizen referendum on California Prop-8.
Roberts is in the “for” camp.
Bingo.
I really didn’t think this issue mattered. I mean were at war...23 million underemployed...wages stagnant..gws about to fly this summer...kids saddled with student debt with lousy prospects..Obamecare flailing. This was a masterful job by the media to deflect away from the nuts and bolts failure of Obama and get the public convinced that this is the civil rights issue of our time.
“The state has an interest in the potentially procreative unit”
Stalin couldn’t have said it better.
Sad, but true. Their "endgame" is coming to pass.
The two “swing votes”, as long as they are part of this court, will be Kennedy and ROBERTS. Roberts is a liberal.
End of story.
I don't disagree at all. But does that mean that Cruz would support overturning DOMA?
Regrettably, I’m not interested in having a serious conversation on the internet.
My opinion isn’t based on procreation or biology, it’s about keeping sex out of the family unit and the complications that sex among blood-related family members can create.
Besides, the Pursuit of Happiness should be kept within the bounds of sense and reason. Otherwise it’s simply the pursuit of pleasure. A distinction should always be made.
Wrong. Stalin would have said that the state owns the children and the parents.
What I wrote is little different than saying, “I have an interest” or “The Church has an interest”.
Why?
Because having an interest is saying that it is an area that impacts on you in some way.
So, can you defend your accusation that I am a Stalinist? Do you have proof? Or are you just exercising your pie-hole?
The next republican to evolve on homosexual “marriage” will be Spanky Christy. He’ll probably do the old Bill O’Reilly song and dance, saying he’s for civil unions for homosexuals, and could care less about the marriage debate one way or the other. Bill O’Reilly should be denied communion. He goes against the Church teachings on marriage. He also says it’s fine with him if homosexuals adopt children, again going against the teachings of the Catholic Church. Both Christy and blowhard O’Reilly are CINOs (Catholic in name only).
Ironically, for the atheist, it would be the State. They know no higher authority.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.