Saying leave up to states is giving up the bully pulpit of the president, and aburgating responsibility for federal policy. The states do not set federal policy—does the federal government recognize homosexual marriage. Seems like Cruz took the easy way out—now he can appease two groups, those that want it left to states where it is being usurped by state and federal courts but his constitutional rights folks thinks he’s siding with them, even if losing. And his homosexual money givers get him out of federal policy, leaving homosexual marriage and benefits in place. Who loses? Conservatives at all levels because homosexuality becomes the law of the land.
Well written and well said. Much better than the previous attacks on Cruz. BUT, there is a difference between Cruz and Paul. Paul thinks the government should stay out of marriage altogether. Cruz goes the states rights route.
I agree with the author of this column and obviously then also Huckabee and Santorum. The only thing is, I have been arguing this issue off and on for 30 years I guess. So I have a decent sense of what is more salable to the uneducated general public which is steeped in emotion and little reason makes it into their grey matter area. States rights will sell easier. Too much bogus groundwork has been laid by the left. Voters just auto-spout the phrases and have no idea what our history really is — or care.
If I am wrong and there is a way to do it the Huckabee way then count me in for the fight. This issue weighs heavy on my heart and I loathe the status of it currently.
A federal marriage amendment would be good if it could be passed. So would an amendment banning abortion. But the president would have absolutely zero involvement with that process. It would require 2/3 of Congress and 3/4 of the state legislatures to pass one. a president could support such a process (and I’m sure most of the Republican candidates, including Cruz would), but that is all they could do. But barring that happening, the correct Constitutional remedy is to return the issue of marriage and abortion to the states where they have always belonged.
It the pope Catholic? Is Evil, Good? Is homosexual “marriage” rational? Is it possible or is it insanity and an evil, irrational use of the body-—which NO “Just” Law can promote.
Our Justice system is based on “Right Reason”-—not vile, irrational pagan, muslim ethics. Our Justice System is based on “...the Laws of Nature and nature’s God”-==not irrational base urges of satanists which are not only evil, but irrational.
We can NEVER promote homosexual “marriage” in a “Just Law”. It is an oxymoron and promoting irrational evil and insanity to children by pretending the radical Marxist ideology that males are interchangeable with females.
All Just Laws have to promote “public virtue” or else they are “null and void”. (Justice John Marshall). Ted Cruz who is rarely wrong is totally wrong on this issue, as is Scalia. Cicero stated that Just Law ALWAYS has to promote Objective Truth—ALWAYS.
There can NEVER be promotion of muslim ethics in our “Justice” (virtue) System which is based on unalienable (that means something, folks) NATURAL RIGHTS from God. Even Jefferson knew that slavery had to go because it was antithetical to Natural Rights.
Our Natural Rights are RATIONAL rights-—not base evil urges by irrational satanists. Sodomy is/was a felony for a REASON.