Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

GOP Lawmaker Denounces Supreme Court's Landmark Same-Sex Marriage Ruling
Newsweek via MSN ^ | April 24, 2024 | Mandy Taheri

Posted on 04/25/2025 6:55:45 AM PDT by fwdude

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last
To: hanamizu

You’re a good example of how many conservatives have capitulated on the marriage issue for comfort and convenience.

“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen.” — Samuel Adams


41 posted on 04/25/2025 9:13:27 AM PDT by fwdude (Why is there a "far/radical right," but damned if they'll admit that there is a far/radical left?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

Marriage is not found in the Constitution, therefore it is a state by state issue. The Supreme Court had zero authority to rule one way or another on it. The federal government has zero authority to legislate one way or another on it. Only by passing an amendment to the Constitution can the issue of what constitutes “marriage” be taken from the states. We have a Constitution that protects us all. FORCE them to obey it.


42 posted on 04/25/2025 9:38:43 AM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

The error of the court in those decisions is that it did not “find”, in the Constitution, that a requirment that same-sex exists, it invented one; it wrote an amendment to the Constitution via judicial fiat.


43 posted on 04/25/2025 10:14:19 AM PDT by Wuli (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

I definitely fully support the overturning of Obergefelll.


44 posted on 04/25/2025 12:20:50 PM PDT by Engraved-on-His-hands
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dilbert San Diego

The Federal Govt has no say in marriage laws. Centuries of States having their own regulations and laws on the subject are proof of that. Put that Federal D^^K back in its holster, and abide by the spirit and the meaning of the clear writings of our Founding Fathers.

Libtard States can allow marriages of perverts, and sane States can ban it. Like abortion, it is a State issue.


45 posted on 04/25/2025 1:11:58 PM PDT by Glad2bnuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

How the hell did government ever get involved in the tenet of “marriage” at all?

Who do they think they are...God?


46 posted on 04/25/2025 4:02:47 PM PDT by ROCKLOBSTER (Celebrate "Republicans Freed the Slaves Month")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Racketeer
Government needs revenue. Hence, the marriage penalty and before long, marriage with a beast will be promoted.

We should ask someone who has firsthand knowledge of that:

BillHillary

Seriously though, the Federal intrusion on marriage (and too much else) stems from the implementation of the income tax. President Trump knows this so is trying to return to tariffs as the primary means of financing (a shrunken) government.

Hence the Democrats, utterly dependent on OUR incomes to support THEIR intrusions into OUR lives, cannot have the money slowed let alone stopped with every dollar accounted for.

47 posted on 04/25/2025 5:05:29 PM PDT by MikelTackNailer (Whoa...those dudes are fags!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: fwdude

America cannot be great as long as evil is legalized here.


48 posted on 04/25/2025 8:07:53 PM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BigB60
The problem is what does the “to promote the general welfare” clause mean? Promoting good heterosexual marriage certainly falls under this.

No it doesn't. "Promote the general welfare" means here's a description of what this document does, keep reading and we'll explain how.
49 posted on 04/26/2025 7:58:55 AM PDT by Svartalfiar (-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Svartalfiar

The Constitution is a series of articles to do all the things that are listed in the prologue. Allowing states to have police forces would certainly be included in the 10th Amendment under the umbrella of “establish Justice.” So why wouldn’t the government have a vested interest in Christian marriage “to promote the General Welfare?”


50 posted on 04/27/2025 2:44:04 PM PDT by BigB60 (C. S. Lewis loves hobbits)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson