he is also against a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. Instead he ignores full faith and credit and gives “the states should...” rino double talk.
I’m an anti-federalist, too. This position, as long as its evenly applied, is a positive for Cain.
he is also against a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. Instead he ignores full faith and credit and gives the states should... rino double talk.
You can’t be talking about Cain.
Ignoring DOMA is treasonous breach of presidential duty
Q: You said that the administration’s decision not to defend the Defense of Marriage Act was “a breach of presidential duty bordering on treason.” Pretty strong language; isn’t this country moving toward acceptance of gay marriage?
A: The Defense of Marriage Act is the law of the land, signed in 1996 by Pres. Bill Clinton. In his oath of office the president says he is supposed to protect and uphold the laws of the USA. To me that is asking the Justice Department to not uphold the law
Source: 2011 GOP primary debate in South Carolina , May 5, 2011
If you believe in Bible, same-sex marriage is moot point
The issue of same-sex marriage was a hot issue in 2004. Eleven states featured ballot initiatives that asked voters if they support a ban on legalizing same-sex unions. The initiatives passed overwhelmingly in all 11 states.
My pastor had a reply ready to those in his congregation who asked him his position on the same-sex marriage issue:”What part of the Bible do you want to throw out?” If you believe in the Bible, then the issue is a moot point. We cannot separate this “civil rights issue,” as the Democrats call it, from the moral issue. There is a tendency among liberals to lower a moral standard to accommodate a civil behavior. The difference between the civil rights struggle and the so-called gay struggle is that the civil rights struggle constantly moved this nation upward to live up to the ideal that “All men are created equal, endowed by their Creator.” The gay rights struggle involves altering the established moral principle of marriage as the union between one man and one woman.
Source: They Think You’re Stupid, by Herman Cain, p. 89-90 , Jun 14, 2005
Amendment to protect the sacred institution of marriage
[Reacting to a ruling by the Massachusetts Supreme Court that allowed for same-sex marriage]: The courts have failed the American people. Congress needs to enact a constitutional amendment to protect the sacred institution of marriage. Liberal-minded judges have opened a floodgate of judicial tyranny that will chip away at the core values of this country until nothing sacred is left! It started with not allowing prayer in schools, not being able to display the Ten Commandments, attempting to take God out of the Pledge of Allegiance and now making same-sex marriages legal.
A constitutional amendment is needed to protect the definition of marriage as the legal union of one man and one woman. If we don’t act now all states could be forced to accep same-sex marriages performed in Massachusetts. We cannot allow this to happen! The long-term effects will further destroy the moral fabric of our society. Congress needs to take action on instituting a constitutional amendment to defend marriage now.
Source: Herman’s Column Archive, North Star Writer’s Group , Feb 1, 2002