Senator Cruz introduces state marriage defense act. (McCain, wage, revolution)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Isn't it funny haow many like you complain that the repubs NEVER do ANYTHING. Then whe they do something, you say it is a waste of time.
Face it, you ONLY want them to act when you agree with them, which is very seldom.
Yeah, having Republicans try to deny Americans their Fundamental Rights for silly reasons. Why can't the Republicans worry about real issues rather than trying to take away rights from Americans?
I like this but I think a constitutional amendment is in order, Cruz is just the guy to get it rolling.
Good luck getting a Constitutional Amendment, you have better chances of winning the lottery than seeing a Constitution Amendment that says marriage is between a man and a woman.
Isn't it funny haow many like you complain that the repubs NEVER do ANYTHING. Then whe they do something, you say it is a waste of time.
Face it, you ONLY want them to act when you agree with them, which is very seldom.
The second sentence is the fallacy.
When they do something, it isn't always a waste of time. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.
In light of the Supreme Court's ruling regarding DOMA, and the reasoning for that ruling, trying to reduce DOMA to state level seems rather pointless.
Rationally speaking, homosexuals are equal, contributing members of society. In order to deny them a right, the authority denying that right has to show why it has an interest, and why it benefits the authority to deny that right. For instance, when the state denies a 12-year-old the right to imbibe alcohol, the state can show that potential harm can arise from allowing a 12-year-old to imbibe alcohol, both to the 12-year-old and to others, and that the potential harm can result in damages to the state. When the state denies homosexuals the right to marry, they have to show the potential harm that such a marriage might lead to. However, marriage, whether between heterosexuals or homosexuals, is seen to stabilize society, to benefit society. The objections raised to same-sex marriage are based on religious grounds, on the objections to homosexuality itself. As we are a sectarian nation, not a theocracy, and a fundamental principle of our system is freedom of religion, we cannot allow the religious beliefs of a few to dictate law. Nor can we allow aesthetic objections, like, "Ew, it's yucky!" dictate law.
Good luck getting a Constitutional Amendment, you have better chances of winning the lottery than seeing a Constitution Amendment that says marriage is between a man and a woman.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
