Posted on 02/16/2019 5:29:42 PM PST by marshmallow
NASHVILLE, Tennessee. February 12, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Republican state legislators have again filed a bill to prohibit same-sex ”marriages” in Tennessee.
Introduced by Republican state Sen. Mark Pody and Republican state Rep. Jerry Sexton, the “Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act” would void U.S. Supreme Court's 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision to legalize same-sex ”marriage” by claiming that Tennessee has already passed a state law and amended its constitution to limit marriage to one man and one woman.
Under provisions of the bill, government officials such as county clerks who issue marriage certificates would be prohibited from recognizing any court ruling affirming same-sex “marriages,” while specifying that the officials may not be arrested for failing to comply with court orders affirming same-sex unions. In addition, the bill requires the state attorney general to defend Tennessee law regarding marriage if challenged by an subsequent court action.
The Natural Marriage Defense Act is known in the state House as HB 1369 and in the Senate as SB 1282.
Should the bill take effect, advocates for same-sex unions likely would challenge it in the courts. A federal district court could rule that the law cannot be enforced because of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling. It appears that the bill, if it becomes law, would require Tennessee to appeal such a ruling to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals and thence to the U.S. Supreme Court.
(Excerpt) Read more at lifesitenews.com ...
States rights issue. Another federal overreach, imposing their will upon the nation.
Good on Tennessee.
Let me guess, people are moving into Tennessee, and out of Mass, NY and Californication.
Forward Tennessee!
TN doesn’t need to do this.
EVERYone - anyone who’s sane, anyway - already knows there IS no such thing as homosexual “marriage.”
Marriage describes the union of opposites.
Try and change the language all you want to suit your base desires and death cult perversions, but it’s NOT “marriage” you’re after, and “gay” doesn’t mean what you’ve co-opted it to mean.
EVERYone - anyone who’s sane, anyway - already knows there IS no such thing as homosexual “marriage.”
__________________________________________________
True, but the Feds can get involved under “anti-discrimination” suits against a protected class. This is what’s allowing people to sue private business for not participating in same-sex celebrations.
For every little Commie bastard like Steve Cohen we have a true patriot stepping up to counter-balance. I was at the food bank feeling shamed and Pody was there with a good word for everyone and expressing Christian faith.
Yeah but SCOTUS rarely reverses itself. And they aren’t going to do it here.
One big thing also is that there has already been a ton of gay marriages across the country. So if SCOTUS were to reverse this, what happens to those marriages? It’d create a mess. It’s one of those things where it’s not simple to just flip the switch back. Once the toothpaste is out of the tube, it’s not going back in. Insurance companies have already changed their policies to accept gay marriages. Employers have changed their benefits. States have changed their laws. Etc, etc..
“States have changed their laws.”
I don’t recall that Ohio has changed the definition of Marriage. It’s in the Ohio Constitution and changing that requires a vote of the citizens of Ohio. Of course SCOTUS declared that definition unconstitutional in terms of the United States Constitution, but I don’t see that they replaced it with another definition of marriage. SCOTUS can’t legislate.
It looks to me that Ohio is without a definition of marriage, which makes me wonder about the impact of that on all the other laws regarding marriage.
There are a lot of legal dilemmas here. The Obergefell ruling killed the Defense of Marriage Act, which was the federal law passed in the 90s that declared marriage was between a man and a woman. (Bill Clinton actually signed that law, btw). But understand that when the Supreme Court strikes down a law as unconstitutional, it’s dead. It’s kaput! Even if the court later reverses itself, it does it on the merits of a new case. The law that was struck dead is NOT suddenly brought back to life. So if SCOTUS reverses itself on a future case, the federal government would have to pass another Defense of Marriage Act. Which I assure you the Democratic party of today will NEVER allow it to pass again. So the only place you can pass a gay marriage ban will be on the state level. That’s a problem because what happens if some states allow gay marriage and others don’t? What if a gay couple get married in a blue state that recognizes the marriage but then that couple moves to Ohio who doesn’t recognize it? That’s going to create a big problem and flood the courts with even more lawsuits. Which is why I highly doubt the Supreme Court will ever reverse that decision.
Gee, have they passed Constitutional Carry in TN instead of wasting their time with this go nowhere Legislation?
Gay “marriage” is a contradiction, and no law can make it real. People with mental illness can have a party, invite all their friends, and even give each other rings before serving a big cake, but that parody will never in any way be connected to real marriage.
Oh no! Icky social issues! Can’t we get back to talking about capital gains tax cuts and going to war in the Middle East again!!
Good for Tennessee! Makes me feel like my votes (at least at the state level) for all these years weren’t completely in vain.
“Let me guess, people are moving into Tennessee, and out of Mass, NY and Californication.”
Sadly, they are, and they’re bringing their Rat-bastard ideology with them.
We’re also trying to push through stringent anti-Abortion laws which will kick in immediately when/if Roe v. Wade ever is overturned. Hooray for the Bible Belt!
Never in my life, anyway.
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.