Ted Cruz Says SCOTUS 'Clearly Wrong' to Legalize Gay Marriage

[Papageorgio]

Like nobody was going to take away abortion rights? Dems already fell for that once.

The Democrats fell for nothing, they used abortion as a wedge issue and failed to act for 50 years.

 

[Papageorgio]

Bigot? Wherever did that come from?

Zombie? Well it has been a long day

Troll Bot? Does it pay well?

He seems to like it.

 

[JoeB131]

The Democrats fell for nothing, they used abortion as a wedge issue and failed to act for 50 years.

Why should they have to? Every Republican they put on the Supreme Court said that they respected precedent. Not a one of them said during their confirmation hearings that they would overturn Roe because it was wrongly decided.

Five of them clearly lied.

If anyone has been using Abortion as a wedge issue, it's Republicans.

Of the 7 Justices that voted for Roe, Five were appointed by Nixon and Ike.

Of the 11 Justices appointed by Republican Presidents, five of them continued to support Roe. Only because Trump was too clumsy or stupid to realize that you didn't want the court to overturn Roe, did he stack the court with religious fanatics.

And now the GOP is going to pay a price. If 2022 was a disappointment for you clowns, wait until 2024, when these stupid laws you've put into effect start really impacting actual women.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Yes, we do need an apple to apples comparison. As stated, the Government is perfectly fine collecting Census and Tax documents by mail, or even over the internet. So why not ballots?

Actually we probably do need some kind of review for the census. That is open to partisan Shenanigans also. But for right now let's solve the problem of completely unsecure elections that are trusted by less than half of americans.

In 2060, some census reviewer is going to be very confused why I wrote down "Klingon" under race on my Census form in 1990.

Yes, I'm sure that they read each one very carefully. I'm sure that will seem very original to them also. They will elbow each other and say look this guy said klingon! Yuck yuck!

As long as I have my bank account number, they don't care.

All I need is the name of this bank that don't care so I can verify your veracity.

 

[rightwinger]

"“We can ease the fear that millions of same-sex and interracial couples have that their freedoms and their rights could be stripped away,” said Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), a sponsor of the bill. “We are guaranteeing same-sex and interracial couples, regardless of where they live, that their marriage is legal.”

Where exactly, are these same-sex couples and inter-racial couples whose marriages are endangered?

Is Justice Clarence Thomas worried? Mitch McConnell? Mayor Pete?

Democrats are evil. Never forget it.

The Conservative threat to same sex marriage was real

Still is

 

[HeyNorm]

He seems to like it.

Yeah, I keep asking him to find a bigoted post of mine.

Given the opportunity he continues to fail.

See, I’m a uniter not a divider.

 

[HeyNorm]

The Conservative threat to same sex marriage was real

Still is

I’ve never considered my right to marry someone of my same sex important enough that the Congress should stop the important business it needs to do.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Buggery is a filthy habit. I support traditional values. And fags are not a part of that.

Thank you for that very thoughtful and well researched dissertation on the immensely critical subject of the right of gay people to marry. Clearly you have dedicated your life to civil rights and humanitarian endeavors. You bring your Lazor sharp intellect and critical thinking skills to fight for social justice and tolerance.

You must have advanced degrees from the finest institutions of higher learning in fields as diverse as constitutional law, psychology, sociology and human sexuality. As always you raise the bar on the level of intellectual discourse and a civil exchange of ideas on the USMB > Please continue to share your indispensable pears of wisdom. God Bless YOU

 

[rightwinger]

I’ve never considered my right to marry someone of my same sex important enough that the Congress should stop the important business it needs to do.

Congress is capable of handling more than one issue at a time

 

[surada]

It's against the morality of people of most of the mainline religions. He can call it evil. I don't.

Now tell me why it's MORAL to ruin a baker over not wanting to bake a wedding cake for a SSM celebration.

There was no problem.. no lawsuit until the baker went on Facebook to brag and mock the gay couple.

 

[Catsnmeters]

The Democrats fell for nothing, they used abortion as a wedge issue and failed to act for 50 years.

Thank you. That was my point.

You expect them to do the same about marriage and fail to act for 50 years or take action like they did?

 

[HeyNorm]

Congress is capable of handling more than one issue at a time

Sure, we are 30 some trillion in debt, homeless filling the streets and they choose this to work on?

 

[rightwinger]

Sure, we are 30 some trillion in debt, homeless filling the streets and they choose this to work on?

Congress can work on many things

What does the Republican House plan on working on?
Hunters Laptop

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Yeah, I keep asking him to find a bigoted post of mine.

Given the opportunity he continues to fail.

See, I’m a uniter not a divider.

big·ot·ry
[ˈbiɡətrē]
NOUN

obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction, in particular prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group:

Example 1 “Gays were always able to marry, they could always marry the opposite sex”
Why is it bigoted?

a) I It reflects the unfounded and unreasonable opinion that gays do not experience romantic love and sexual attraction and therefore it is not important to them to be able to marry a person of their gender......and/or

b) It reflects the opinion gays do not deserve to find fulfillment and happiness in marriage because they are who and what they are

In both a and b above, no factual, objective, or compelling reason has been presented to support the position

Example 2 Gays should not be allowed to marry their own gender .

Why is it bigoted? It reflects the opinion that gays should not be able to marry the person of their choosing because they are “different” in some way that precludes their right to marry. That is an obstinate and unreasonable belief, in the absence of any factual or objective or rational reason for it

 

[Papageorgio]

Thank you. That was my point.

You expect them to do the same about marriage and fail to act for 50 years or take action like they did?

If it gains them votes, it will.

 

[Catsnmeters]

If it gains them votes, it will.

No way...policy for votes? Say it isn't so.

 

[Papageorgio]

No way...policy for votes? Say it isn't so.

Some don’t believe it happens, many liberals after the Dodds decision took Joe’s opinion. So talk to them because they don’t believe it.

 

[HeyNorm]

big·ot·ry
[ˈbiɡətrē]
NOUN



Example 1 “Gays were always able to marry, they could always marry the opposite sex”
Why is it bigoted?

a) I It reflects the unfounded and unreasonable opinion that gays do not experience romantic love and sexual attraction and therefore it is not important to them to be able to marry a person of their gender......and/or

b) It reflects the opinion gays do not deserve to find fulfillment and happiness in marriage because they are who and what they are

In both a and b above, no factual, objective, or compelling reason has been presented to support the position

Example 2 Gays should not be allowed to marry their own gender .

Why is it bigoted? It reflects the opinion that gays should not be able to marry the person of their choosing because they are “different” in some way that precludes their right to marry. That is an obstinate and unreasonable belief, in the absence of any factual or objective or rational reason for it

1. Fact. Gays have always married you goofball. Just like straights, they married someone of the opposite sex. And they’ve been doing it for centuries. From what I’ve heard, some have even said, after such, they discovered they were not gay after all.

1.A. I never said they didn’t. Those Romantic love and sexual attraction are not, in my humble opinion, a requirement to marry. And many have fulfilling lifelong loving relationships without marriage, so thinking one must be married to have such, is actually somewhat bigoted in itself.

1.B. I think everyone should seek happiness, but marriage does not require that nor does it guarantee same.

Example 2. I wouldn’t allow any same same sex couple to marry, regardless of sexuality, while continuing the time honored tradition of allowing gays to marry someone of the opposite sex, even if the other was also gay.

See, not bigoted at all.

And, while we’re at it. If we are going to make marriage about sexuality, how can a bisexual ever find joy and happiness?

Is that why they’re installing the suicide nets under the Golden Gate Bridge?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

1. Fact. Gays have always married you goofball. Just like straights, they married someone of the opposite sex. And they’ve been doing it for centuries. From what I’ve heard, some have even said, after such, they discovered they were not gay after all.

You are just repeating the same bigoted bull shit while in no way presenting anything resembling a counter argument. From what you heard....? Are you fucking serious?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

.A. I never said they didn’t. Those Romantic love and sexual attraction are not, in my humble opinion, a requirement to marry. And many have fulfilling lifelong loving relationships without marriage, so thinking one must be married to have such, is actually somewhat bigoted in itself.

1.B. I think everyone should seek happiness, but marriage does not require that nor does it guarantee same.

More bullshit! You are not responding to the point that I made. I never said that love and attraction is required. That is just your pathetic attempt to squirm out of the truth of your bigotry. The point is that EVERYONE should havethe opportunity to seek love and sexual attraction HOWEVER they wish be it in marrage or not or with a same sex partner or not. You are just confirming your obvious bigotry