#1 Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by Eglman 14.02.2014 07:56

avatar

Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee introduced legislation today that would allow states to set their own standards as to what defines marriage.
Breitbart reported:

On Thursday, U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced S. 2024, the State Marriage Defense Act, which allows states to set their own standards as to what defines marriage and protects the states from having the federal government encroach on that territory.

Thirty-three states define marriage as the union between one man and one woman.

Cruz stated:
I support traditional marriage. Under President Obama, the federal government has tried to re-define marriage and to undermine the constitutional authority of each state to define marriage consistent with the values of its citizens. The Obama Administration should not be trying to force gay marriage on all 50 states. We should respect the states, and the definition of marriage should be left to democratically elected legislatures, not dictated from Washington. This bill will safeguard the ability of states to preserve traditional marriage for [their] residents.

Lee echoed:
How a state should define marriage should be left up to the citizens of each state. It is clear the Obama administration finds the principles of federalism inconvenient in its effort to force states to redefine the institution of marriage. The State Marriage Defense Act provides an important protection for states, respecting the right to choose for themselves how each will treat the institution of marriage under the law.

Meanwhile… A federal judge struck down Virginia’s ban on gay marriage on Thursday.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2014/02/...ge-defense-act/

#2 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by algernonpj 14.02.2014 10:27

avatar

First the constitution neither delegates the definition of marriage to the federal government nor denies it to the states.

Secondly a lot of sturm and drang would eliminated if a 'civil union' between two people (homosexuals in particular) were granted the same legal status as 'marriage' of two heterosexuals. Of course this solution would eliminate a 'good crisis' currently being used to undermine society.

IIRC in parts of Europe everyone goes to city hall for a civil union. Then those who choose to do so go to church and are married, i.e. have their union blessed in the eyes of God.

#3 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by conservgramma 14.02.2014 10:43

avatar

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #2
First the constitution neither delegates the definition of marriage to the federal government nor denies it to the states.

Secondly a lot of sturm and drang would eliminated if a 'civil union' between two people (homosexuals in particular) were granted the same legal status as 'marriage' of two heterosexuals. Of course this solution would eliminate a 'good crisis' currently being used to undermine society.

IIRC in parts of Europe everyone goes to city hall for a civil union. Then those who choose to do so go to church and are married, i.e. have their union blessed in the eyes of God.


I thought this for a while also, but now I'm beginning to see that gays would not be satisfied with civil unions, neither will they be satisfied with gay-marriage itself, even though that's what they are pushing currently.

They will in fact not be satisfied until everyone is forced to accept their lifestyle as 'normal' and anyone who opposes this are criminalized and punished. This is what they want - dissent silenced and all dissenters punished or even executed if necessary. I think if we don't fight it will come to this.

This is an old article but a good one:

http://www.redstate.com/2013/03/26/gay-marriage-and-religious-freedom-are-not-compatible/

From the article:

Zitat
As long as there are still Christians who actually follow Christ and uphold his word, a vast amount of people around the world — never mind Islam — will never ever see gay marriage as anything other than a legal encroachment of God’s intent.



This is a religious battle not just a secular one. And it is not a civil rights or equality battle - its a 1st amendment battle. A battle we must fight, we cannot yield or compromise, we must WIN at all costs.

#4 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by Frank Cannon 14.02.2014 12:03

avatar

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #3


I thought this for a while also, but now I'm beginning to see that gays would not be satisfied with civil unions, neither will they be satisfied with gay-marriage itself, even though that's what they are pushing currently.

They will in fact not be satisfied until everyone is forced to accept their lifestyle as 'normal' and anyone who opposes this are criminalized and punished. This is what they want - dissent silenced and all dissenters punished or even executed if necessary. I think if we don't fight it will come to this.





I don't think so. Most of the gays I know have no interest in getting married or having kids or any of the things the super small minority of gay activist push for. If you look at the amount of gay marriages that take place in states that legalize it, it usually drops to nothing after the initial excitement wears off.

As far as I am concerned, the govt' should stay the hell out of any of this. Marriage is a religious institution and is something God should judge, not some appointed judge or half assed legislator.

#5 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by conservgramma 14.02.2014 12:17

avatar

Quote: Frank Cannon wrote in post #4
Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #3


I thought this for a while also, but now I'm beginning to see that gays would not be satisfied with civil unions, neither will they be satisfied with gay-marriage itself, even though that's what they are pushing currently.

They will in fact not be satisfied until everyone is forced to accept their lifestyle as 'normal' and anyone who opposes this are criminalized and punished. This is what they want - dissent silenced and all dissenters punished or even executed if necessary. I think if we don't fight it will come to this.





I don't think so. Most of the gays I know have no interest in getting married or having kids or any of the things the super small minority of gay activist push for. If you look at the amount of gay marriages that take place in states that legalize it, it usually drops to nothing after the initial excitement wears off.

As far as I am concerned, the govt' should stay the hell out of any of this. Marriage is a religious institution and is something God should judge, not some appointed judge or half assed legislator.



Oh I absolutely agree that most gays are really not interested in marriage. Most of the ones I've met actually have multiple partners, the last thing they're interested in is marriage! However with that said.....most of these guys do however want their lifestyle accepted as 'normal'.

So it really does get back to the 1st amendment. Gays should have the freedom to their lifestyle....but on the flipside people of faith should have the freedom to be vocal against that same lifestyle without fear of imprisonment (hate crimes), being told what they have to teach in Church, or what they can believe, or who they can or cannot give their business to. If a faith owned business chooses not to bake a cake they shouldn't be forced to.

BECAUSE of the 1st amendment - the govt has no right to be involved in any of this! Gays have the freedom to be gay - and those who believe this lifestyle to be a sin should have the freedom to believe that too!

#6 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by ThirstyMan 14.02.2014 12:22

avatar

Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #2
First the constitution neither delegates the definition of marriage to the federal government nor denies it to the states.

Secondly a lot of sturm and drang would eliminated if a 'civil union' between two people (homosexuals in particular) were granted the same legal status as 'marriage' of two heterosexuals. Of course this solution would eliminate a 'good crisis' currently being used to undermine society.

IIRC in parts of Europe everyone goes to city hall for a civil union. Then those who choose to do so go to church and are married, i.e. have their union blessed in the eyes of God.


There are a lot of false claims that accompany "the need for gay marriage." The one I hear most often is the gay partner has no visitation rights as family if the person is hospitalized. That is such a crock of sh$$t. It doesn't need a marriage vow to solve. The ONLY one I can see as somewhat valid is the medical sharing of a partner's healthcare. How being "married" is needed to force an insurance company to grant such benefits isn't clear either. The whole gay marriage agenda is fraught with gigantic canards which the press conveniently fails to investigate because the liberals want gay marriage to succeed.

#7 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by algernonpj 14.02.2014 13:46

avatar

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #3
Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #2
First the constitution neither delegates the definition of marriage to the federal government nor denies it to the states.

Secondly a lot of sturm and drang would eliminated if a 'civil union' between two people (homosexuals in particular) were granted the same legal status as 'marriage' of two heterosexuals. Of course this solution would eliminate a 'good crisis' currently being used to undermine society.

IIRC in parts of Europe everyone goes to city hall for a civil union. Then those who choose to do so go to church and are married, i.e. have their union blessed in the eyes of God.


I thought this for a while also, but now I'm beginning to see that gays would not be satisfied with civil unions, neither will they be satisfied with gay-marriage itself, even though that's what they are pushing currently.

They will in fact not be satisfied until everyone is forced to accept their lifestyle as 'normal' and anyone who opposes this are criminalized and punished. This is what they want - dissent silenced and all dissenters punished or even executed if necessary. I think if we don't fight it will come to this.

This is an old article but a good one:

http://www.redstate.com/2013/03/26/gay-marriage-and-religious-freedom-are-not-compatible/

From the article:

Zitat
As long as there are still Christians who actually follow Christ and uphold his word, a vast amount of people around the world — never mind Islam — will never ever see gay marriage as anything other than a legal encroachment of God’s intent.


This is a religious battle not just a secular one. And it is not a civil rights or equality battle - its a 1st amendment battle. A battle we must fight, we cannot yield or compromise, we must WIN at all costs.


Great link.

My thinking in going the civil union route is to remove the pretext for giving homosexuals special treatment as a disadvantaged minority and expose the fact that radical homosexuals are aggressively trying to prevent Christians and Jews from freely practicing their religion. In other words have us set the ground rules for the discussion.

Here in NJ we have civil union which is fully equal to 'marriage'. This replaced 'civil partnership' which was almost legally equal to marriage. I find it very annoying that our illustrious -R gov when he discusses refusing to sign a bill legalizing gay marriage does not point that out aggressively; he certainly has a big enough mouth.

You'd be surprised how many people are thrilled to have ammunition to counter some aggressive gay who whines about not being able to have their partner inherit or make health care decisions for them.

Presently gays are one group being used as useful idiots; the words Pink Swastika keep coming to mind.

#8 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by algernonpj 14.02.2014 13:52

avatar

Quote: ThirstyMan wrote in post #6
Quote: algernonpj wrote in post #2
First the constitution neither delegates the definition of marriage to the federal government nor denies it to the states.

Secondly a lot of sturm and drang would eliminated if a 'civil union' between two people (homosexuals in particular) were granted the same legal status as 'marriage' of two heterosexuals. Of course this solution would eliminate a 'good crisis' currently being used to undermine society.

IIRC in parts of Europe everyone goes to city hall for a civil union. Then those who choose to do so go to church and are married, i.e. have their union blessed in the eyes of God.


There are a lot of false claims that accompany "the need for gay marriage." The one I hear most often is the gay partner has no visitation rights as family if the person is hospitalized. That is such a crock of sh$$t. It doesn't need a marriage vow to solve. The ONLY one I can see as somewhat valid is the medical sharing of a partner's healthcare. How being "married" is needed to force an insurance company to grant such benefits isn't clear either. The whole gay marriage agenda is fraught with gigantic canards which the press conveniently fails to investigate because the liberals want gay marriage to succeed.

In most, is not all, states most of those common canards could be issued by a visit to a lawyer.

#9 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by Cincinnatus 14.02.2014 15:04

avatar

Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee introduced legislation today that would allow states to set their own standards as to what defines marriage.
Breitbart reported


Given that the Constitution says not one word about the Federal government and marriage, are not the 9th and 10th Amendments adequate to this issue? I mean, in a sane world, of course.

#10 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by Frank Cannon 14.02.2014 15:24

avatar

Quote: conservgramma wrote in post #5
.....most of these guys do however want their lifestyle accepted as 'normal'.




I am secretly rooting for the gays to have full acceptance. That way my special interest group can rise to prominence and become an oppressed victims group.

Hard core cross dressing bondage freaks into cribbage and fortified wines need a voice too!!!!!!

#11 RE: Senators Ted Cruz and Mike Lee Introduce State Marriage Defense Act by Rev 14.02.2014 20:10

avatar

I think the fact that we're even having this discussion in our country today only proves that we're on greased tracks headed toward the abyss.

I mean, if we could have a séance with the Framers right now, they'd tell us to grab a musket and go hit the reset button, "because you're done!"

Xobor Create your own Forum with Xobor