Posted on 10/30/2014 12:23:27 PM PDT by BurningOak
"Those are his personal choices. I’ll tell you, I love my iPhone," Cruz said.
"Listen, Tim Cook makes his personal decisions, and that is his life. My focus is on the constitutional question of who has the authority to make decisions," he later added.
Cruz said that marriage is a "question for the states" because of the country's federalist system.
"This is something we’ve seen over and over again, which is the federal government and federal courts deciding they don’t trust the people," Cruz said. "They look down on the people, they don’t trust us to make judgments about our own lives, so the federal government and federal courts are going to step in and impose their own policy preferences."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
The Atheists, taking a cue from the homosexual community, are desperately trying to hijack the word "Bright" as their sobriquet. I refuse to allow it.
Yes. We agree. Homosexuality is a perversion. However, one has nothing to do with the other. Indeed, in logic one simply cannot have anything to do with the other. "Marriage" is by definition on the civil level the legal union of a man and a woman as recognized by the state. For example, in Europe, couples marry civilly, and then in church. What those in favor of "Gay Marriage" propose is the recognition of exclusive same-sex partnerships based on perversion as "marriage." Man is not woman. Day is not night. A horse is not a cow.
IOW, the state may be powerless to prevent the perversion, but has the power to prevent those of the same sex from entering into a "marriage." No state, IIRC, has the power to prevent perverted behavior between consenting adults. What Cruz is saying, I believe, is that every state has the right to refuse them to call their partnership in perversion "marriage," by sanctioning it with a license. Furthermore, the federal courts are beyond their scope when they override such state laws, especially when called for by referendum.
At one time homosexual (and bestial) perversion was punishable in every state, subjecting perverts to arrest, and punishments up to and including death. Many of these state laws were very rarely, or often selectively enforced, and so were overturned in some cases, rescinded, or simply allowed to lapse. What the gays are attempting is to silence the opposition to their drive for state recognition of their illicit unions, because the activity is no longer punished.
Not much of a reason, IMNVHO. Those opposed have every right to shout them down. The trouble will come when pervert-couples from one state wish to have their partnership in perversion recognized formally in another state. If the state's are truly sovereign, one state need not honor another state's license, just as they deny out-of-state licenses of Dentists and Real Estate agents!
Again, if two homosexuals wish to enter into some sort of lifetime legal contract with each other, privately granting each other all sorts of rights, that is available to them now, without legal prejudice. If that's not enough, TS.
62 was well put and well said...kudos to you
So you support the LGBT agenda, which is what this Tim Cook issue is about. If that is the truth, then why do you come to FR? Jim has made it clear where he stands on this issue and you obviously disagree with him.
This post my friends is why democrats keep winning election after election.
Jesus Christ himself wouldn’t be a pure enough candidate for some of you.
Freedom is what I am after. I am ok with people living as they wish as long as I can live how I wish. Maybe some FReepers are not any more into Liberty than some libs and just want everyone to live their way. That isn’t freedom.
98 could not have been stated any better...to do otherwise as some would have him do (hell/fire/damnation/brimstone) is a sure fire way to never see the oval office.
Are you purposely trying to avoid seeing what I’m saying to you here? Do you honestly think Romney would have been as bad as Obama, and would have handed the reins of government including the Pentagon over to Islamists as this admin has done, and completely destroyed all our efforts in Afghanistan and Iraq, as this admin has done? You cannot be serious.
If your neighbors Steve and Jerome wish to live in their split level in your neighborhood as "man" and """Wife,""" it is OK with me if you're OK with that. However, it is not OK with me if the government I support with tax dollars recognizes Steve and Jerry as a legally "married" couple. Just because we don't shoot queers anymore, does not mean we have to encourage them or grant them special favor, including Affirmative Action.
Furthermore, what if your church is opposed to gay marriage? Are Steve and Jerry going to allow you and your pastor free speech to oppose their arrangement.
If the nominees are 1) a compromiser and 2) an evil marxist tyrant who hides his real identity and agenda and acts in complete disregard of the Constitution and Congress, are you honestly saying not to vote for the compromiser?
Really?
Have you never read about the Constitutional Convention, and how the Founders relied on compromise to get the job done?
Tim Cook worships himself.
But Tim and other homosexuals want you to care, otherwise they would not reveal their shame. Therefore, we will inexorably be made to care until we are bent over and grabbing our ankles.
You are implying again.I don’t agree with Tim Cook’s decisions however it is again none of my Damn business. That doesn’t mean I support LGBT and for you to try to make that connection is a stretch. To further involve Jim’s name as a tactic to silence my opinion is not becoming of a FReeper. In fact I invite him to read what I have stated on this matter. The two have absolutely nothing to do with the other. If Timmy isn’t committing a crime I don’t care what Timmy does. If you don’t wish to buy his products then fine I won’t criticize you. Guess why? That is your choice. Just like it is his choice what he does in his spare time. Liberals want to control every aspect of a person’s free will...not conservatives
I agree that he should keep his private affairs to himself...you and I see eye to eye on that one.
Liberals/Progressives are not for freedom. I’ll do what I can to defeat them. Weed out the RINOS in the primaries and if that doesn’t work, I’ll go for a RINO before a Liberal and then do what I can to get the RINO in line.
Cruz-West 2016
Romney was a horrible candidate from the get-go who lied about his real positions on nearly every issue, “severely conservative” and who would have dragged the Republican Party farther and farther to the left with him.
I do not know if he would specially “hand the reigns of the Pentagon over to Islamists” but that is hardly the only issue or most important people are thinking about when they vote.
I am never going to vote for a liberal liar of either party or at all. Ever.
Have you never read about the Constitutional Convention, and how the Founders relied on compromise to get the job done?
Nice try but that’s a pitiful rebuttal.
The Dems and their Republican helpers don’t care about the Constitution.
Votes have to be earned not expected because a candidate is a Republican.
Do you know there are 20-year-old-swirls-gossip of Perry being a little big gay back then? It’s a secret Austinites have held over his head for a long time.
No, I wasn’t aware of that.
You might as well just pull the lever for the worst possible candidate.
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.