Posted on 10/07/2014 6:50:49 AM PDT by SoConPubbie
div class="photo_caption">U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz in an interview with The Washington Post's Dan Balz at The Texas Tribune Festival on Sept. 20, 2014.
Hours after the U.S. Supreme Court paved the way for same-sex marriage bans to be lifted in five states, U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz called Monday for amending the U.S. Constitution to prevent either the federal government or the U.S. Supreme Court from overturning a state's ban on same-sex marriage.
Cruz announced his plans in a statement Monday in response to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to let stand appeals court rulings allowing same-sex marriages in Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia and Wisconsin. Cruz called the court's decision to let those rulings stand "tragic and indefensible" and expressed concern that it would lead to the overturning of same-sex marriage bans in every state.
Like other statewide Republican officials in Texas, Cruz has been an ardent defender of the state's same-sex marriage ban, which was approved by Texas voters as an amendment to the Texas Constitution in 2005. The Texas ban was ruled unconstitutional by a U.S. District Judge in February. The state immediately appealed that ruling to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.
"When Congress returns to session, I will be introducing a constitutional amendment to prevent the federal government or the courts from attacking or striking down state marriage laws," Cruz said. “Traditional marriage is an institution whose integrity and vitality are critical to the health of any society. We should remain faithful to our moral heritage and never hesitate to defend it.”
The Constitution limits the Federal Government from not only creating new rights for itself but as well creating new rights for others. What we see with all this homo marriage is a Federal Government creating from whole cloth a new class of minority from a group of perverts and then granting them special rights & privilege. As such, an amendment to limit the out of control Federal Government is quite appropriate.
seriously, regardless of anyones opinion on whether or not queers can marry each other, fedzilla is NOT supposed to be involved in the first place...besides, itll be DOA just like all the other crap out of consgress for years now...
I'll follow Gods Law, ole ted should be focused on getting the fed out of the states' and private lives of everyone, before somebody gets hurt, likely a bunch of queers and the politicians they rode in in...
ya'll see what i did there ???
For instance gay marriage in the military, for federal employees, and in immigration and foreign policy makes a state trying to forbid it, impossible in reality
It saddens me that a freeper has no grasp on enumerated powers and States rights. I hope I am misreading you... So, what you are saying is that when driving on a interstate highway in New Jersey, you are OK passing traffic on the right...just because your state allows that and 10A doesn't "dictate" that?
Never make it out of committee.
Amen, Ted! Thank God there are still some leaders like Senator Cruz who stand up for morality and common sense!
SoConPubbie wrote:
<<
Bull!
Only if you believe the polls and only if you give up.
Prohibition was in favor at one time, so was slavery.
Public perception and positions on Major issues change throughout history.
Furthermore, there is always a constitutional convention, and finally, force.
>>
************************************************************
Hear, hear!
This is true — by the 10th amendment the right of determining marriage is either the purview of the States or the people. (Now whether they conform to God's definition is another question.) The real point here is that the federal government sees itself as superior in all ways and the states as servile, rather than recognizing that it has limited powers which have been delegated to it by the states.
I'll follow Gods Law, ole ted should be focused on getting the fed out of the states' and private lives of everyone, before somebody gets hurt, likely a bunch of queers and the politicians they rode in in...
ya'll see what i did there ???
Yep; and I agree.
The legal realm is entirely a losing situation for Christians — once you put into law the definition of marriage you cede your authority to the government and then the government can change the definition after it has become the unquestionable in the area.
No, the place to fight for traditional marriage
is in our own lives — treating it as though it is sacred. (This means churches refusing to remarry divorced people, refusing to turn a blind eye to adultery in its congregation, etc.)
Since you didn’t actually address my post but made up one of your “”so if”” personal fantasies, I have no idea what you were trying to say.
My post was.
“The 10th doesn’t dictate federal law and regulations on marriage, and that has been very important to the left/libertarians supporting it. [it=gay marriage]
For instance gay marriage in the military, for federal employees, and in immigration and foreign policy makes a state trying to forbid it, impossible in reality”
Christians in America also fight abortion in law and voting as well as in their personal lives, that goes for the homosexual agenda, porn, child molesting and everything else.
Marriage is defined in law, that was true for Thomas Jefferson and George Washington, as it was for Ronald Reagan and Abraham Lincoln.
One doesn't need to care about the law, it was never required and isn't required today. Under that situation, people could personally define marriage anyway they wanted to in private, in 1788, and in 2014 **IF** they don't care about the law.
There is a reason why this didn't happen 10 years ago but it is happening now. Back then they were worried about voter backlash.
The liberal justices are certain that there will be no backlash over this now. If there was a chance that Dems get punished at the polls for this, and massive public protests and civil insurrection(maybe states defying them on this) , they wouldn't try it now.
But Obama took a pro-homo-marriage position in 2012 and had no trouble winning the election. The judges all were watching.
There is a reason why they call themselves 'progressives'. They make progress is their goals.
been there/done that...Pastor stood firm and the congregation voted to be worldly and allow a member to willfully lie and destroy his marriage...
pastor as well as several families [mine included] have left that place to the world to wallow like the hypocrites that they are...
Ephesisans 5 is a good barometer of the local Church...
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.