Posted on 04/07/2015 8:28:42 PM PDT by massmike
The TEA Party needs to become a tribe. Im a native American...
Heap big trouble for squaw Warren.
I agree, let’s start our own tribe.
Yes, like the government wouldn’t break a treaty and run over their rights.
Wow, how bigot, homophobic, nazi of them..../s
“I agree, let’s start our own tribe.”
My family has been in the country for almost half a millennium, am I qualified to be native yet?
In the process of wealth redistribution and disregard for national law, Native American tribe nations were never safe from comrade dictator obama.
At least the Indians are still sane.
Maybe we all need to declare ourselves Indians like Fauxcahontas.
Well, that is a start.
I watched a report on Londonistan, and it seems all the British Johny Jihads were former liberal artists who were into Booze, drugs and sex and felt betrayed by their own society. Some of them are suspected to even be homophobic “former” homosexuals.
That would explain a lot as to why muslims at Al Jazeera would support a queering of America.
But but but...
the homofascist revisionist historians have claimed that native american peoples were one of the examples where same sex marriage existed.
part Seminole here, and ready for the Tea Party tribe.
One of my ancestors came over, fought the American Revolution and later on in the winter of 1796/97, gave shelter to an Indian who needed to say for the winter. My great, great, great, great, grandmother was saved from a rattler bite by an Indian squaw who sucked the poison out. Does this count? B-)
Bookmark.
Until very recently, this was the official position of the entire human race. even those of us who keep on top of things seem to have lost track of just how crazy our culture has become.
Fauxcahontas and her party are deeply saddened.
Thank you for referencing that article massmike. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.
Citizens probably wouldn’t be concerned about pro-gay activist justices looking for an excuse to legalize gay marriage outside the framework of the Constitution if state lawmakers hadn’t ratified the ill-conceived 17th Amendment, foolishly giving up the voices of state lawmakers in Congress by doing so. This is because if 17A hadn’t been ratified then there would probably be all different faces on the Supreme Court at this time, state sovereignty-respecting justices who would simply clarify that the Constitution’s silence about marriage means that it is a 10th Amendment-protected state power issue, not the business of the corrupt federal government.
Another way to look at the constitutionality of state laws prohibiting gay marriage is this. Regardless of pro-gay, PC interpretations of the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protections Clause by the corrupt courts, pro-gay activist judges and justices don’t want low-information citizens to know that the states have never amended the Constitution to expressly protect gay issues like gay marriage. So activist judges and justices don’t have any constitutionally enumerated gay right to throw at the states via the 14th Amendment where legal majority voters have prohibited gay marriage.
The 17th Amendment needs to disappear.
When liberal darlings collide...
Two Brave not make-um good pow-wow in single tee-pee.
But make-um tee-pee well appointed with keen fashion sense.
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.