Posted on 02/13/2014 1:01:53 PM PST by xzins
Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) introduced a bill Thursday to ensure states don’t have to adhere to the federal definition of “marriage” and “spouse.”
S. 2024, the State Marriage Defense Act, would require that the federal government give the same deference to the 33 states that define marriage as the union between one man and one woman as it does to the 17 states that recognize same-sex unions.
“Under President Obama, the federal government has tried to re-define marriage, and to undermine the constitutional authority of each state to define marriage consistent with the values of its citizens,” Cruz said Friday. “The Obama administration should not be trying to force gay marriage on all 50 states.” Cruz and Lee said Obama should respect states’ rights to define marriage, rather than it being “dictated from Washington.”
“I support traditional marriage,” Cruz said. “This bill will safeguard the ability of states to preserve traditional marriage for its residents.”
The Supreme Court recently struck down provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act, saying it was discrimination for the federal government to not recognize gay marriages that are legal within some states. Although the court decision allows states to still determine whether to recognize same-sex marriage, Cruz and Lee said the administration is using the ruling to “force” a same-sex marriage agenda.
“It is clear the Obama administration finds the principles of federalism inconvenient in its effort to force states to redefine the institution of marriage,” Lee said. “The State Marriage Defense Act provides an important protection for states, respecting the right to choose for themselves how each will treat the institution of marriage under the law.”
Supporters of gay marriage argue that its a human rights issue and that everyone should have the right to get married. .
bookmark
State’s rights issue.
Nice words. I wish to God I could believe those words. I am so disenchanted now I can't see a path forward to stop any of this. I feel like there are less than a dozen in Congress worth a crap. There are just not that many of us left and we will die off. Most young kids are being indoctrinated. 50 or so "gender types" on Facebook? What the hell happened to this country?
Agree, and there is no 14th amendment equal protection issue either.
In a nutshell...people in this country stopped believing in AMERICAN EXCEPTIONAL-ISM and THEMSELVES.
It drives me crazy that there is all manner of hand-wringing and wailing on about “What are we gonna do??”
We need to collectively suck it up, roll up our sleeves and DO WHAT HAS TO BE DONE!
Dammit!
What did our Founding Fathers do? What happened when the Japs attacked PEARL HARBOR??
People seem to forget the simple FACT that this COUNTRY and this GOVERNMENT BELONG TO US!! IT IS OURS and by GOD that’s the way it’s going to be!
Jeeze Louise!
Human rights issue so therefore they should be fighting for polygamy too, after all they shout human rights issue, oh wait they don’t because they’re hypocrites and have an agenda
Hey! What's all this laying around stuff? Why are we all still laying around here for? ... Over? Nothing is over until we decide it is! Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? Hell no! And it ain't over now. 'Cause when the goin' gets tough... The tough get goin'! Who's with me? Let's go!
What the heck happened to the Free Republic I used to know? Where's the spirit? Where's the guts, huh? This could be the greatest night of our lives, but we're gonna let it be the worst. "Ooh, we're afraid to do anything because we might get in trouble." Well just kiss my ass from now on! Not me! I'm not gonna take this.
Reid, he's working at the Vegas Pawn Shop.
Pelosi, Alcatraz.
Obama, greeter at a Frisco bath house!
Boehner ...
Let’s roll, brother!
Amen!
Thank you CRUZ AND LEE!!!!!!
GOD BLESS YOU
God defined marriage. Those who try to redefine it might as well be trying to redefine “up” and “down,” before jumping off eighty foot cliffs.
Believe me, the rocks at the bottom won’t care about your definitions.
Cruz and Lee are off-base. States have no “right” to define marriage.
It is what it is, no matter what any of them think about it.
“then a person ought to be able to marry an automobile,”
The way some men act about their cars, I can see this kind of marriage being supported among men. :)
States have the right to uphold our millennia-old definition of marriage: one girl and one boy against those who want it to mean anything marrying anything.
Any powers/rights not expressly enumerated by the Constitution as FED responsibility are reserved to the states.
No state has any right or legitimate authority to overrule the laws of nature and nature’s God. All they possess is the obligation to order their laws and policies thereby.
Good night.
Well, the States are the Laboratories that prove ideas and policies harmful or advantageous. Witness Walker with Wisconsin unions, Texas with taxes, California with over-regulation.
If a state wants to welcome same-sex, those seeking it will abscond to it, leaving the state that denies them it. Win-Win, if you ask me.
The Tenth Amendment is unconstitutional and racist./s
I didn’t read it that way. I read it as Cruz and Lee saying that states can’t be discriminated against by the Fed if those states define marriage in a way consistent with the values of its citizens.
It would be possible to say that states shouldn’t be in the marriage business at all, but they are, and even if they weren’t, they’d still have to relate to married people, so it would behoove them to have some understanding of what constituted that in their particular state.
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.