U.S. House delays passage of same-sex marriage bill

Reuters via Yahoo ^ | December 6, 2022 | By Moira Warburton, Julia Harte and Joseph Ax

[Oldeconomybuyer]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Passage of a bill protecting federal recognition of same-sex marriages that has the support of both LGBT advocates and religious groups, has been delayed in the U.S. House of Representatives.

The bill was initially expected to be debated and passed by the full House on Tuesday. It is now expected to be attached to an unrelated defense bill that is still under discussion by House and Senate negotiators.

[rlmorel]

Yeeeeeeeeeeeep.

“We had no choice”.

[pgyanke]

Supporters don’t want a vote recorded for a stand alone bill, so they are trying to attach it to a must pass defense bill.

Exactly. Translation: Democrats have no problem with a standalone bill but RINOs do. It's the GOPe suggesting to put the bill in defense to give them cover.

[frogjerk]

It would be great if it backfires.

[ConjunctionJunction]

He knows exactly what he’s doing.

[Amendment10]

"U.S. House delays passage of same-sex marriage bill"

---

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

Patriots are reminded that the Constitution's silence about marriage means that the federal government has no express power to define marriage, and must therefore respect the constitutionally unchecked 10th Amendment power of the sovereign states to prohibit same-sex marriage.

"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.

In other words, Pelosi's scandalous support of constitutionally indefensible “right” to murder unborn children, and now her back door support of likewise politically correct same-sex “marriage,” were never anything more than unconstitutional expansions of Democratic vote-winning, politically correct federal government powers imo.

[Eleutheria5]

“they are trying to attach it to a must pass defense bill.”

Hold up your rear, so’jer!

[glaseatr]

P1."We want to audit the money that goes to Ukraine."

P2. Talks to collogues and gets them to stuff the Defense bill with everything they can to hide what an audit might find.

P1. "This is why we need to reset this Republic".

[Mouton]

Where is that nearby asteroid and can it be targeted on dc.

[Dagny Muriel]

So long as taxation, federal inheritance laws, and regulations such power of attorney when incapacitated, and the division of assets upon dissolution are based upon marriage, the federal government should recognize any two people whom jointly share property, income, and accounts with one another.

The government should not even be involved in “marriage”. Marriage is a religious institution. The government should only recognize “civil unions”. The IRS documents should read “civilly united filing jointly”. The government has no place in religion. In fact, many initially came to this country to avoid the persecution and bias based upon religious ideology.

Get out of religion and get into the tax, estate and other consequential laws surrounding 2 individuals living within the defining factors of a “marriage” (which again, is truly a civil union. The government has no authority with my commitment to God and my spouse when I was truly married)

Also, as far as taxation issues go, getting out of the theft that is property and income taxation would solve that issue. Fair tax anyone?

[Skid289]

Probably most religious groups besides Baptists and Catholics, and a minority of Methodists and Lutherans.

[rlmorel]

I like the way you think...!

[ridesthemiles]

Bills in Congress need to be SINGLE SUBJECT BILLS ONLY.

Too many shenanigans with bundling.