Will bring the rats out of their holes to vote against it..
NO.. I mean the republicrats..
Is this a distraction so we won’t notice that he wants to INCREASE legal immigration?
Like it’s going to go someplace.
Go Ted go! Restore America’s Biblical foundation! Crush hussein’s communist takeover! Woo hoo!
(However, I do appreciate his stand for states to tackle this issue, and helping to strengthen the stripped-down powers of the several states.)
States that have their own constitutional amendments affirming and upholding traditional marriage (NOTE: THESE ARE NOT "GAY MARRIAGE" BANS DAMNITALL!) should have told these federal judges to piss off.
Federal judges have no jurisdiction or compelling arguments in overturning these state amendments.
Good amendment
The "Incorporation Doctrine" is unconstitutional and should be rejected. A better bill would be to repeal the Incorporation Doctrine as unconstitutional and thus put the first ten Amendments back on their feet. The feds would have no pretended authority over anything mentioned in the first ten amendments including marriage.
In the alternative, the danger of introducing a "marriage amendment" into Congress is that one way or the other almost certainly the original or amended wording will not be air-tight enough for the feds to construe some sort of power to enforce. That's all they need.
Their pretended power to enforce the first ten amendments via the phony Incorporation Doctrine has lead to an unimaginable parade of horribles including banning prayer and the Bible in public schools, forced integration, affirmative action, and quotas, prohibiting state anti-abortion laws, interfering with individuals right to discriminate (freedom to choose), and attempting to overturn state anti-gay marriage laws.
Better would be to slay the underlying lie of the Incorporation Doctrine and put the first Ten Amendments back on its feet.
I’m all for a Constitutional Amendment like this, but one should realize that it’s going to take about seven years to go through the process. Congress has been setting time limits on approving Constitutional Amendments (maximum time), which has been seven years. But it is possible for enough states to ratify it in just one year ... but unlikely. If it’s wildly popular with the voting electorate, I would say about three or four years.
I appreciate Ted Cruz but the States already have the right to make their own laws reserved to them by them in the 10th 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.
If the little gods in the black robes can crap on the one we have they can also crap on the ones made.
What they need to do is make it a capital crime with the death penalty for any one in Government to use their power to make void the 10th amendment.
just making himself toxic as a presidential candidate and toxic as a vice presidential candidate, yikes
This needs to be done and soon. SCOTUS is going to force this carpola on all 57 states come June.
First thing I disagree with Ted on.
1. Bad timing. At this exact point in the campaign where he is either at his peak of popularity or a tiny crest he will ride to the top, he needs to put his religion inside his sleeve a bit and focus on economic and political conservatives, and low Info dems who are over obama and don’t like Hillary. More focus now on his religious beliefs will have people whose religion is not their focus for their President turning away from him.
2. Gay marriage is toothpaste out of the tube. While I agree that marriage laws should be a states’ rights issue, cruz is not playing chess with the idea. This is a waste of all effort. If it passed, you’d see political correctness felling states like dominoes anyway, and great states who didn’t fall would become marginalized. They would be HURT economically for being the “ homophobic holdouts.” Gay marriage could have been stopped 5 years ago, but alinsky methods win every time. People would rather be in an ISIS fire cage than ridiculed. It’s over. Gay marriage is here to stay. Cruz should have moved strongly on another issue now, not this one.
Mr. Cruz... keep a goin'.
While I will vote for Ted Cruz if Republican nominee, I don’t see the two Houses of corrupt Congress supporting Cruz’s resolution for proposed marriage amendment with constitutionally required 2/3 majority of each House, particularly since being pro-gay is evidently regarded as a way to win votes. So this is action by Cruz is just smart campaign politicking on his part imo.
Misleading headline. Cruz is attempting to protect the sovereignty of the states in defining marriage and is, thereby, attempting to protect states’ rights, as per the Constitution.
Cruzing with Ted.