|
 |
|
|
BillyBoy: Same-Sex Marriage is impossible regardless of what states say about it. Same-sex marriage won’t exist unless God changes human biology so people of the same gender can form a union.
What happens to full faith and credit? Does Tennessee have to recognize same-sex marriages from Massachusetts?
PING for the next time someone accuses Rand Paul of being a liberal or something for taking same position
In fact, PC interpretations of the Supremacy Clause (6.2) aside, the Supreme Court has clarified in broad terms that powers not delegated to the feds expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate marriage in this case, are prohibited to the feds.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.But we’re not hearing anybody in corrupt DC mention 10A because, despite RINOs now controlling Congress, it is still one of the best-kept secrets in DC.
The author's recollection is incorrect. It was Judge Moore who stood on the ground of the Constitution and the Federal courts who disobeyed it.
Amendment ICongress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Amendment IX
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
CRUZ or LOSE!Ted’s plan will not work as the entire nation is devastated even if one state or one county has Gay Marriage.
Why not 5 guys & 2 gals in a "group marriage" -- perhaps the lefty loony states could lead the way in opening that door!
If it was up to the states it would be held off longer. But if the current trends continue there wouldn’t be a state in the union 20 years from now whose marriage amendment couldn’t just be repealed by a popular vote, in my opinion. There are states who only passed theirs in the 50-60% ranges in the middle of the last decade who probably couldn’t pass them again if a referendum was held now.
Freegards
That’s how Fred Thompson lost support of conservatives.
Leaving it to the states is and will be a disaster. Plus leaving it to the states often means leaving it to Federal courts which have been overturning state constitutions and state laws on the matter.
Cruz is right.
First: The FEDERAL constitution is mute on marriage, as it was considered at the founding, and should still be considered, a matter that comes under the “rights” left to the states and the people to decide upon; not the Federal government; any of it.
Second: There is no FEDERAL constitutional amendment that adds “sexual orientation” to the protected classes under the civil war amendments, and without such an amendment the supreme court justices cannot - responsibly - make one up by themselves, and thus there is NOT a federal constitutional basis for same-sex marriage on the same grounds as was previously found for interracial marriage.