Posted on 10/06/2014 3:23:04 PM PDT by BurningOak
WASHINGTON, DC -- U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, today issued the following statement regarding the Supreme Court’s decision to reject requests from five States to review state laws that prohibit same-sex marriage.
“The Supreme Court’s decision to let rulings by lower court judges stand that redefine marriage is both tragic and indefensible,” said Sen. Cruz. “By refusing to rule if the States can define marriage, the Supreme Court is abdicating its duty to uphold the Constitution. The fact that the Supreme Court Justices, without providing any explanation whatsoever, have permitted lower courts to strike down so many state marriage laws is astonishing.
“This is judicial activism at its worst. The Constitution entrusts state legislatures, elected by the People, to define marriage consistent with the values and mores of their citizens. Unelected judges should not be imposing their policy preferences to subvert the considered judgments of democratically elected legislatures.
“The Supreme Court is, de facto, applying an extremely broad interpretation to the 14th Amendment without saying a word – an action that is likely to have far-reaching consequences. Because of the Court’s decision today, 11 States will likely now be forced to legalize same-sex marriage: Virginia, Indiana, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Utah, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia, Kansas, Colorado, and Wyoming. And this action paves the way for laws prohibiting same-sex marriage to be overturned in any state.
(Excerpt) Read more at cruz.senate.gov ...
My guess is that there would be some pretty big protests in Russia. Heck, over a million turned out in France against homo-marriage about a year ago, as I recall. On several occasions, albeit after their socialist party leaders had already made it a done-deal.
Would we see the same in America? I once used to think so. But I’m (regretably) becoming convinced that the modern American populace just either doesn’t have either the backbone or moral character anymore that it once had, throughout its history. And/or the country has just become too morally degraded and comfortable in its own deviant culture. All part of a bigger picture in which America is gradually transitioning from being the greatest force of good the world has ever known, to a nation that actively celebrates and promotes evil. Hope that’s not the case, but it sure seems like the direction America is heading.
Whatever the case, any country that legally and culturally equates two perverted faggots as the same as a husband-and-wife is no longer a country I’ll be pledging allegiance to.
What is the license worth anyways? What makes it so important?
In Tennessee its - “The marriage license is good for 30 days and costs $97.50. This cost is reduced to $37.50 for all persons who have attended four hours of premarital preparation by a qualified instructor.”
Not sure why states are in the marriage licence business today.
while looking marriage licence up at TN govt website, I noticed one is required to show a Social Security card which is ironic that leftists reject this same requirement for voting.
Yes that what we need, another amendment to the Constitution. Sorry, no we don’t need it.
I’d prefer to see him as a Supreme Court Justice. I think his talents would be best used in that position.
First, every state should simply tell the supreme court and the federal government to go to hell.
Second, 5 of the SC justices should be impeached and removed. If I thought a republican senate with a republican president in 2016 would do that then I’d get excited about voting again.
I pray you are correct !!
I have felt that way for years....everyone seems to have lost the ability to say go to hell to people who come up with inane decisions......do it, or else......O.K., or else what????
when did that happen????Walker is great and I think that he is pushing things as far aS HE CAN.
Well, SURE!! There's the answer to EVERYthing!
/sarc
See Post #36
We need this man as President
“The fact that the Supreme Court Justices, without providing any explanation whatsoever, have permitted lower courts to strike down so many state marriage laws is astonishing.”
Then he ought to make himself Dictator once elected and end this sham once and for all.
Sometimes that's what it takes to fix a Republic.
There is nothing in the Constitution that says the SCOTUS must number nine.
He could add six PATRIOTS to the Court and then make that freeloading vacation taking sucks at golf too imbecile foreigner and his comrades attempt to transform the USA look pale in comparison.
The fact that he has the stones to speak out with such coherence against this MONSTROUS act by the UNELECTED CLOWNS on the SCOTUS is very encouraging.
POLITICIANS AND THE COURTS IN DC HAVE NEVER SOLVED ANY PROBLEM EVER.
Someone needs to take things in hand.
And Washington gets its money from ALL of the states including Oklahoma. Washington takes our money and then keeps it from us unless we obey their every whim.
“..Federal Marriage Amendment needs to be introduced TODAY.”
And I dare Dems in purple states to vote against it.
Agreed that America is no longer a majority Christian moral nation. Hence, as John Adams said, “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
Therefore, what Constitution is adequate to give man freedom when that freedom leaves man open to anarchy and pure human evil (which is what I consider all these immoral laws).
Hmmm. Wondered what the first immoral law was and what the domino effect was. Abortion, first and worst—Holy Spirit starts releasing restraints on evil, no-fault divorce was second, now gay marriage, next polygamy, child marriage, pedophilia, days of Noah, human sacrifice here when obolacare is in full force.
First of all, Cruz is suspect on legal immigration. He seems to be okay with mass legal immigration generally, and specifically has bought into the myth that we have a shortage of high tech workers. Any Republican not committed to ending mass immigration is just whistling past the graveyard.
Otherwise Cruz is impressive. It would be nice to have the clearly superior debater for a change, and someone capable of comfortably and ably articulating a conservative message.
But Cruz cannot reasonably hope for a Reagan-like landslide. No conservative can. Reagan’s America was much more white, and therefore much friendlier to Republicans and conservatives. Remember, Romney did about as well with whites percentage wise as Reagan did in 1980. But thanks to immigration-driven demographic changes, the difference is one between an easy landslide win in 1980 and an embarrassing four point loss in 2012.
It is almost inconceivable that a Republican carries populous states like Calif, NY, and Illinois now.
I do agree that the GOP’s best shot is going after disaffected Perot white working class voters. This could win them states like Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin, and reclaim Ohio. It could help them hold southern states like NC. It could help them everywhere. This could allow for an impressive electoral college victory for Republicans. But what evidence is there that the GOP will give these people a reason to vote for them? The GOP elite would rather go after a more fashionable Hispanic vote that is naturally hostile to them and naturally inclined towards the Democrats.
There are paid trolls on this forum. You think a response from one poster on this forum is conclusive?
> “First of all, Cruz is suspect on legal immigration. He seems to be okay with mass legal immigration generally, and specifically has bought into the myth that we have a shortage of high tech workers.”
You are misinformed, woefully incomplete in your knowledge and misguided likely by detractors. That means you’re not fit to lead a discussion on this subject of Ted Cruz and immigration.
To correct your misconception first recognize that Ted Cruz is talking about Einstein and Von Braun types of intellect.
It is a fact that America does not have a monopoly on great brains that exist and are born everyday.
Consider for sake of argument that the world has 10,000,000 scientific geniuses of which America has 50% born and cultivated on its soil and the remaining 50% are born throughout the rest of the world in places such as Russia, China and India.
What Ted Cruz is saying is that to maintain America’s superior technical edge, it must grab as much as it can of the 50% that are born outside the USA just as it did following WWII in bringing German brains to American soil.
It is a question of ‘market share’. America is still attractive to foreign scientists but only if they are recruited and given lots of assurances of academic freedom and plenty of budget to develop their ideas and carry on with others in their class.
Ted Cruz is not talking about tech workers programming a CNC machine or anything like that. He is talking about top university and corporate scientists.
It is analogous to sports. An American team will pay what it takes for top talent. Same thing goes in high level science.
Ted Cruz is not for mass immigration. He has said that illegal aliens must be found and deported. To ‘find’ them he says a system of identifying them must be implemented so they can be rounded up.
All of the above are easily verified by downloading and reading many of Ted Cruz’ amendments (none of which were passed) to the Senate immigration bill. Although none of his amendments were passed, he and his staff worked hard to get everything on record where he stands. And he is definitely not for any kind of amnesty or supportive of any path to citizenship for illegal aliens.
Do your homework and you will see.
Second part of response following response post #78.
> “But Cruz cannot reasonably hope for a Reagan-like landslide. No conservative can. Reagan’s America was much more white, and therefore much friendlier to Republicans and conservatives. Remember, Romney did about as well with whites percentage wise as Reagan did in 1980. But thanks to immigration-driven demographic changes, the difference is one between an easy landslide win in 1980 and an embarrassing four point loss in 2012.”
Again it is evident you are injecting your own observables into this mix. Several independent analyses based on scientifically representative samples concluded it was the Perot demographic that sunk Romney. This is the blue collar working class demographic that did not vote for a presidential candidate. They will vote for a conservative and no one else. They number 6 million plus strong.
Cruz can carry a large portion of Latinos. The Latino demographic will either vote for a Latino or for a non-Latino who their union bosses (e.g. SEIU) say vote for. But they will defy union orders if there is an unapproved Latino on the ballot. That’s the way their loyalty runs. Therefore, Cruz can carry California.
America sure needs this man in the White House.
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.