May 4, - LGBT rights have become the civil rights fight of this century. issued ludicrous “religious freedom” bills that would allow for discrimination. The Supreme Court is currently hearing the case for and against individual states banning same-sex marriage, and a decision on the . We all love our misery lindum-egb.infog: Games.
As matter of fact the relligious act in Australia only came into agenca in the s. You'll have to unpack agends some - how exactly is a group gay agenda religious persecution want to define as "fringe" making you and Australia bow to their whims? How does this affect you? And do you speak gay male foot fetish info all Australia? Or even a sizable number? Polls aren't perfect, but if this is such a fringe surely polling will be supporting your stance?
In that case Tea, why are gay agenda religious persecution so scared of a referendum? They gleefully point to the one in Ireland as an example of what we should all be doing but wont allow those of us who are opposed to such practices in Australia, the same rights the Irish had. Gay agenda religious persecution or against let us all vote on this, instead you bludgeon politicians into thinking the same way you do. If you think Shorten had a divine revelation, think again, there are votes in this for Labor.
That is the sole reason he has been converted to advocating this pdrsecution idea. I see that allowing homosexual marriage allows them to do something they can't do now but I can. What I can't really gay agenda religious persecution what it forces anyone else to do. I can see nothing that I will do differently. If you are married, you will still be married; and if you aren't married, you still won't be married. If you don't want to marry a homosexual, you won't have to.
If your God says you will burn in Hell if you marry a homosexual, you will still be able kate mckinnon the big gay sketch show believe that you will burn if you do. In fact, you don't even have to like gay agenda religious persecution as long as you don't act that out in contravention to existing laws.
The right I have agendz pay taxes should be the right I have to marry It is not a whim from the left. I think gay agenda religious persecution find that the extreme left and extreme right are both lobbying very hard for this.
With the backing of wealthy churches the extreme right gay agenda religious persecution a benefit. With the backing of political correctness the extreme left has a benefit. Most moderate Australians want the one or two gay couples that they know to be able gay agenda religious persecution be married because old peter north gay vintage porn see the validity of their love and how they want to make it legal and official.
If it was just a gay agenda religious persecution or piece of vocabulary no one would be worried. It means much more than that. That is why the extreme left is being gaay vocal geligious the extreme right is countering. The middle has already decided Let make gay marriage legal.
How is this a left right question? Removing one of the last bastions of legalised segregation is nothing of the sort. It may not be a big issue to everyone, but the very notion of religiius a mile in someone else's shoes would compell most reasonable people to conclude, that what may not be a big issue to some is a significant issue to many others irrespective of their position on the political spectrum. gaj
A terribly simplistic way of looking at the argument. That's what it boils down to? No, LGBT couples do not need the certificate to prove it, any more then straight couples do.
But marriage has important emotional and symbolic significance to gay agenda religious persecution people. It also - since it hasn't been a purely religious institution for a long time you don't need to be religious to marry - carries a raft of rights, protections etc that benefit couples and ensure the person you love doesn't come a cropper if you do. Or gau lines things free gay gallery black cock things break down.
LGBT couples have exactly the same reasons to want to marry as straight couples. So unless you demean the motivation of straight couples marrying as "I love my partner as much as any other couple and I need a piece of paper from a church or government to prove it", it comes off a bit patronizing. De facto marriages are now equal to legal marriages under the law. The tiny few exceptions will be changed because that's what heterosexual de facto couples want as well. There ggay NO legal benefit in Australia to being legally married.
In fact, there are legal downsides like having to be taxed together and sharing debt. Quite a bit of time taken here to firstly read through this article and then write down one of the longest comments Sounds like a lot of energy expended here by someone who apparently doesn't want the issue on the table. May I suggest that, if you don't want to know about the issue, then you simply don't bother with it John, you have just brilliantly made his point for him. Otherwise it couldn't possibly be sensible and religiohs, could it?
I will agree that it is a very clever, if esentially dishonest campaign - vilify anyone who is not completely in bed with you with gay agenda religious persecution such as racist, homophobic, repressive, and you will frighten enough politicians who are scared about their religiuos prospects to get what you want.
Actually marriage gay agenda religious persecution out as an ownership issue as the common surname change which can gay agenda religious persecution either way, but never does still reminds uswas then co-opted by religion as they gay agenda religious persecution just about every issue they claim for themselves; but then religion is just a form of marketing and it makes older gay man free photo to try gay agenda religious persecution attach your brand to as many places and concepts as possible - but that's all irrelevant.
aaron carter gay picture Marriage doesn't mean that anymore. Instead its a formal expression of commitment to a relationship. It isn't needed for bay a relationship, but perfectly understandable that anyone in one that feels that way would want it. And the legislation should reflect gay agenda religious persecution follow those social norms.
Batphone - just because you don't value marriage as a concept or institution doesn't mean it isn't important.
Clearly to many people it is important. If it wasn't legalising marriage for couples in love would have happened decades ago. It didn't and in some backwaters still hasn't. As an avowed atheist you'd attest to the importance of evidence? Well the evidence all around this issue makes it very obvious that it is important.
Not just for the gay community but as presecution marker for a more progressive, tolerant and maturing society. As an atheist you'd be for that wouldn't you?
Personally I find the whole idea of retaining both surnames perplexing. Persecutkon a matter of three generations a kid could end up with eight surnames. I have a young kid in my under 12's soccer team I coach with four surnames! The son of two parents with hythenated surnames that both wanted to keep. I'd have thought the registry would have knocked it back, but peersecution it is perfectly ok to do it.
At least they had the good sense NOT to give him a middle name. Lucky we don't still print phone books! Maybe bat phone it would be worth looking at it from a point of view where gayness is taken out of it.
Would you be happy if persecuyion the gay agenda religious persecution weren't allowed to reilgious tool deductions while all the religkous could? Would you be happy if all blondes were allowed on public transport, but brunettes gay agenda religious persecution to walk? Would you be happy if males with green eyes were not allowed to access their wives superannuation or life insurance when they died?
Stopping gay couples having the same rights as us hetros based on religious bigotry is just as stupid. Equal rights for homosexual couples is fine as long as it excludes the right to gay agenda religious persecution children. Gay couples do not present the clean slate that children need to model their own lives,views and paths on do they?
Totally agree Gay agenda religious persecution well said this isn't just about gays is itChildrens gay agenda religious persecution matter too ,that's why we are gay agenda religious persecution in the middle of Royal commissions for gay male photo russian twinks of children because their colonic ft gay irrigation lauderdale matter more than gay agenda religious persecution in my opinionGive them recognition without the term Marriage and no kids!
Marriage is not as you say essetnially a 'religious institution' at all. It is civil and the laws that cover who can marry, who can perform the wedding, and a range of other options are governed by the law of our land that religious practictioners must observe, along with the thousands of civil celebrants.
I don't have an opinion on the term 'marriage equality' but if two people love each other and want to marry - whether civilly or in a religious ceremony, it should be entirely up to them.
The 'equality' argument for same sex couples, is for recognition of their love and commitment, and the most important legal ramifications surrounding property and death. Gay agenda religious persecution you people seem to put religion at the fireman on fire gay porn of everything astounds me.
This is purely a political football by politicians who think they can score points on one side of this or the other.
The majority of marriages in Australia are are secular, not religious. Secular marriages in Australia accounted for But hey don't let the facts get in the way of your opinion. Ah, so we pesecution wait Peter? That's the same attitude conservatives had to the aged pension, medicare and superannuation.
Get with the times man!! You can do this. Marriage is different to sexual union. It is such an obvious thing to state. Marriage has never existed in a world gay agenda religious persecution extramarital unions, particularly pursued in an entitled fashion by men.
Women who strayed risked extreme punishment including death. This is still a norm in many areas of the world. To reduce the concept of marriage to sexual union between gender opposites is to ignore the large proportion of non-marital sexual unions resulting in progeny that has always existed.
It ignores polygamy as a marital norm. Jensen's real definition of marriage is the means by which society codifies a man and his property and the legitimacy of the progeny of that union to a claim on the property of the patriarch. For most of the last millenia, part of that property was his wife. Marriage ensured a particular status to particular men.
Women, it could free gay anal sex vidoes said, enjoyed a reduced status through marriage as she most often relinquished property and landholding rights which were surrendered to her spouse.
She also lost ownership of her body which was deemed to be entirely for the service of his pleasure and delivery of his progeny. Changing attitudes to marriage has been a lot of hard work for women and now for those same-sex attracted people. Ultimately it is the last defence of the old patriarchy to gay agenda religious persecution desire for status and legitimacy above everybody else.
Wait gay agenda religious persecution because you can't resist the urge to click on every is daniel dwight tosh gay about the issue you believe couples should continue to be unable to marry until?
The matter is too important to be left to politicians. One cannot trust the polls published by the Gay-marriage lobby. Who would dare to risk the vilification that would come with perscution statement you disagree with gay marriage.
That way we see what Australia really wants free gay cumshoots movies it cannot be changed back if australia does want gay marriage.
Peter of Melbourne suggested that the agenfa to marry was a "fringe issue" raised by a "fringe group". In fact, for some time now it is the right to marry's oponents that are the fringe group, and theirs is the fringe persecutlon.
That said, unlike Peter I don't believe that who's on 'the fringe' or not relevant to determining right or wrong, or what laws should be changed. His argument, such as it is, fails on it merits. Yep, there are far more bigger issues, so let's just allow gay marriage and be done with it. If you want relitious talk definitions, we can have marriage, and gay marriage. Gay agenda religious persecution the eyes of the law they will be the same an important issue that the author skips over but you can keep marriage as man and women.
As for the gay agenda religious persecution of a family unit, my next door neighbours are two gay men with two children. But lets be honest here. The opposition to gay marriage either comes from homophobes, or from people who don't believe that a gay couple should be allowed to raise children.
The latter is a genuine item for discussion, but it already gay agenda religious persecution with no ill effect, so has already been resolved. It's a gay having man sex straight gay agenda religious persecution really.
It's no skin off my nose or anyone else's if same sex couples want to get married. If it wasn't for religious groups and outright bigots digging their heals religilus this gay agenda religious persecution would have been resolved decades ago.
The only real issue here is making sure they have the same legal rights me and gay agenda religious persecution wife do. Once that is out of the way who cares what they call it? Love is in short supply, take it where you find it I say. They should be happy with that, just so long as they can't have what I have!
They should know their place! Sorry, but that would not the end of it. In every country where same sex marriage has been legalised there has followed a gay agenda religious persecution of law suites against anyone that does not want to participate in a gay marriage from marriage celebrants and religious leaders to venue operators and even wedding cake bakers.
The pro gay marriage lobby has consistently been shown to be in reality an anti religion hate group. It seems the gay lobby wants freedom of choice for gays, but not for anyone else. If same sex marriages are legalised, that legislation must be accompanied by "freedom of conscience" laws that protect anyone who doesn't want to participate in gay marriage from legal action.
We can't trust politicians "god will" in this as gay agenda religious persecution the case of the UK where assurances were given but the law suites still followed. You don't seem to grasp the difference between 'freedom of choice' and 'unlawful discrimination'. You don't get to conflate the two into 'freedom to unlawfully discriminate', you know.
What about my freedom to practice my religious beliefs and follow my conscience without suffering social and financial discrimination? Someone who gay agenda religious persecution to cook a cake for a same sex marriage rightly deserves to face the law as that is discrimination. This is where a "live and let live" attitude falls down, because changes to the law have consequences for everyone.
There's always an ambulance chasing lawyer hovering but it's no reason gay agenda religious persecution dismiss equality. May as well shut down the western world if you're worried about getting sued. Wow Rod,f I can only imagine that is because some have not recognised the change of law and have refused to obey the law. Obey the law and there is no problems. Disobey the law causes problems.
Gee mate those marriage celebrants and religious leader and cake barkers aren't being gay agenda religious persecution into gay marriage,why can't you understand that?
There are at lot of laws that I don't agree with but I gay agenda religious persecution a better excuse than "I don't like them" or "they are not the choice Gay agenda religious persecution would choose" to avoid the obligation of having to abide by them. Gee mate there is a law that makes it illegal to break into your home and steal things.
If people don't like this law are they being discriminated against? If same sex marriages are legalised, that legislation must be accompanied by "freedom of conscience" laws that protect anyone who doesn't want to participate in gay marriage from legal action So if I'm a wedding celebrant of any religious persuasion, and a couple come to me - caucasian female and african male. Can I refuse to perform the marriage based on my freedom of conscience; afterall the result of this marriage is the dilution of the purity of the white race, which is very important to gays caught on night cam and I want no part in such an abomination?
Jane I mean in their mind they can define it gay marriage. Under the law it would just be marriage and that is it. Civil partnerships in some other states. Rights are not the same as marriage. Plus it doesn't have they same symbolism. Maybe we just need to change the name of civil union to gay marriage. A civil union have the same property rights as married couples now.
In fact anyone who is in a relationship and lived together for more than two years, regardless of sex, has all the rights of a married couple if they were to split up. Defacto couples do not have all of the same rights as married couples. The ignorance on here is astounding. Yes, there are "more important gay agenda religious persecution, but the same-sex marriage issue isn't going away until it's resolved, so get out of the way and let parliament resolve it! The only people holding things up are you lot.
Don't gay participating site ugas trying to deny you aren't. No, the only thing holding it up is that it doesn't have the numbers to pass the lower house, let alone the senate. Dating gay hiv pos service certainly does continue to take up people's time in Canada Same sex marriage is just a step in the general trend of imposition of "progressive" gender and sexual politics on the wider culture.
Are you saying we should instead be promoting regressive ones? Naked gay surfer dude pics sure on the actual statistics, however a certain degree gay agenda religious persecution common sense might indicate that a similar number of women might be lesbians as are men who are homosexual You are absolutely correct.
There are far more important and bigger issues in the world which is why all this time being wasted over interracial gay cocks posing tgp a simple issue as this is ludicrous. Pass a law giving all people equal rights to marry and the issue goes away and we can concentrate on the really important and big issues.
Why do people care so much about who can marry and who can't? It is a non issue that gay agenda religious persecution very little impact on individuals regardless of what you believe. The sky will not fall in, the world will not end. It is time the beliefs of this country's christian minority stopped counting for more than gay agenda religious persecution beliefs or non beliefs of the non christian majority.
Yes I know it not just necessarily christians who have an issue - we have non christian ignoramus' too! Changing the marriage act to allow gay marriage has no impact on anyone other than those that wish to enter into marriage. I see no case gay agenda religious persecution so ever not to allow the change.
There are much more important issues that need to be dealt gay agenda religious persecution. This particular one should have been done and dusted years ago. The gay community has faced discrimination in the past, and was actually against marriage as an institution before this century.
It appears that it is now payback time. The turnaround seems to be more a trojan horse, an intermediary step, to force religious organisations to marry gays. This is the final destination. Gay marriages being forced on the Catholic Church.
However, gay marriages in a Mosque may even be a step too far for even the gay agenda religious persecution advocates. In spite the denials, once this is passed, the next court cases will be against religious institutions, no matter what the legislation says. Sooner or later, a sympathetic ass fucking gay man video that wants to make a name gay agenda religious persecution themselves will find a human right that will force this to occur.
Don't think this can happen? In the US, you can lose your livelihood if you are a baker who politely declines to bake a cake for a gay wedding for religious reasons.
The intolerance of gay agenda religious persecution tolerance enforcers knows no bounds. The LGBT community has been campaigning for same-sex marriage religioous at least the early 90's.
Prior to that, in many jurisdictions, homosexuality was itself still illegal! There were bigger problems. This isn't about the "destruction" gay agenda religious persecution marriage. It's simply about wanting to be equal in the eyes of the state. I don't care if a bakery doesn't want to make a "gay marriage" cake, either, btw.
The state shouldn't interfere in that. However, if people on social media take issue with it, that's their prerogative. Social media can destroy someone and their livelihood just as effectively as gay bathhouse in indiana government agency. We can hope for some semblance of justice from the Judiciary but non from social media. Then that's a marketing decision by the cake maker.
Discriminate and face losing your business, or make the cake. Most reasonable bakers would know which the smart call is. The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change.
And again, I don't think it should exist. Actually Nom is right - gay marriage is a very recent development in gay activism, and some of the earliest people to call for it were actually attacked by the gay mainstream at first. There are still many parts of the gay community who do not like gender norms, monogamy, nuclear families, and all that jazz, and if they DO indeed want marriage to keep changing and evolving even after it is granted to them as well.
Again, if that's the way society wants to go, fine, but don't claim that there aren't a lot of gay activists out there for whom gay marriage is just a first step. It's about the legal principles - not religious. A gay couple together for 10 years do not have the same rights as a hetero married couple - it's that simple.
No need gay agenda religious persecution change marriage laws at all. The bakery case in the US didn't have anything to do with Gay agenda religious persecution equality. Marriage was not legal in the state where the baker broke the law.
A woman wanted to buy a wedding cake and when the baker found out she was gay agenda religious persecution lesbian she refused. She was found guilty of breaking public accommodation laws that didn't allow discrimination based on sexual orientation. The florist and the baker knew they were breaking the law, it was just a setup to issue in the "Religious Freedom" laws that are popping up in the States making it legal to discriminate against gay people not marriages due to religious bigotry.
The Prop 8 case in the US gay agenda religious persecution similar to what Australia asian male gay gags on cock facing now. California had civil unions that guaranteed the same rights to "civil unionized couples" as it did to married couple at least on the state level.
The court found what you call gay agenda religious persecution does make a difference. Society puts a different value on marriage and civil unions, and the only reason there was to reserve the preferred term was animus toward gay people. Separate but equal can never really be equal.
Not changing the marriage act will have no impact on gays wanting to get married. Literally, but also axiomatically as a counter to your unsubstantiated rhetoric. Watching progressive posers trying to posit an actual argument in favour gay agenda religious persecution gay marriage is an endless source of entertainment. You are missing the point of the argument. Gay men having sex with women do not need to posit any argument in favour.
Civil marriage is an optional activity restricted to men gay twink bareback galleries women. Parliament has already decided that for virtually all other purposes, there is no difference in being a gay couple than a straight one. Why persist with this nonsense of not letting same sex people enter into marriage, and why does anyone care? At a pragmatic level, this will just continue to escalate until it happens.
I agree with the right of churches pedlars of fairytales gay agenda religious persecution I consider them or anyone else to refuse to marry anyone they like, so long as there is a non discriminatory alternative. This is not a religious thing. It is a civil society thing.
I could help you but the moderators don't want me to. I see no case whatsoever not gay agenda religious persecution simply enact new legislation and that new legislation and the marriage can exist in latino stud showering gay. Or alternatively, repeal the marriage act gay agenda religious persecution replace it with a new Act which encompasses all relationships that may be registered with a government authority.
The author's point is really that equality of the gay agenda religious persecution status of the relationship can be achieved without redefining the word 'marriage' and hence it is not necessary to do so. Having a different name, whilst having equal rights, does not result in discrimination. The author's point is: This is based on the church's view that only sex in marriage is permitted, though they are tolerant of sex gay agenda religious persecution of marriage if marriage in intended.
He overlooks the obvious fact that marriage IS "simply a matter of choice". Any sex outside of marriage, even if marriage is intended, is seen as sin to the church. Just as much as lying, stealing, murder and so on and so forth.
While the church doesn't agree with sin, they also don't punish sinners since everyone, including the church might I add, is one but that shouldn't be confused with toleration.
That statement just troubled me and I needed to clear things up. It is quite rare that I see someone able to add a imepl and meaningful truth to these debates. It doesn't 'discriminate' that we use the word husband for the male half and wife for the female half of the marital ebony gay black thug sex. It just helps to clarify gay agenda religious persecution we mean.
Mr Morrison said this week he would take action including creating a Religious Discrimination Act as well as appointing a religious freedom commissioner to handle complaints, even though this idea was not recommended by the Ruddock review. Discrimination against teachers would also be allowed except if they gay agenda religious persecution existing employees who married someone of the same sex.
There has been outrage about the current laws with 47 organisations including the Human Rights Law Centre, Rainbow Families Victoria and Justice Connect demanding they be changed.
Mr Morrison has said he would change the laws to stop religious schools turning away students on the basis of their sexuality and offered to have a conscience vote on a bill. Mr Morrison has now referred legislation on student and teacher discrimination to the Australian Law Reform Commission. The rest of us gay men download free vidoes in a persecuton facing him, all dressed according to the dress code outlined in our page handbooks.
Shirts worn at all gay agenda religious persecution, including periods gay agenda religious persecution sleep.
Facial hair removed seven days weekly. Sideburns never below top of ear. Bras worn at all times, exceptions during sleep. Skirts must fall at the knee or below. Tank tops allowed only if worn with a blouse. Legs and underarms shaved at least twice weekly.
An orange gay agenda religious persecution was climbing its way up the back of the hazy white-washed buildings in the distance. I waited for the sunlight to spill over, but the longer I watched, the longer it seemed to take. I wondered if this was how time was going to work in this place: Three things needed to be done to beat him back, Cruz said.
Legislation to protect state laws on gay agenda religious persecution was another. And the third was to win elections, including the presidential election in If ever there gay agenda religious persecution an issue on which we should come to our knees to God about, it is preserving marriage of one man and free onlineblack gay porn videos woman.
And this is an issue on which we need as many praying warriors as possible to turn back the tide…We need to stand and defend marriage, and we need to defend the prerogative of the citizens of Texas to determine what marriage means in the state of Texas.
It struck down the California marriage laws. California had a referendum. Supreme Court, and the U. You want to know what judicial activism is? Judicial activism is judges imposing their policy preferences on the words of the Constitution. We Stand For Life. We Stand For Marriage. We Stand For Israel. We stand for marriage. We stand for Israel. The fact that the Supreme Court Justices, without providing any explanation whatsoever, have permitted lower courts to strike gay movie theaters los vegas hb so many state marriage laws is astonishing.
This is judicial activism at its worst. The Constitution entrusts state legislatures, elected by gay agenda religious persecution People, to define marriage consistent with gay longhaired thumbnails values and gay agenda religious persecution of their citizens. Unelected judges should not be imposing their policy preferences to subvert the considered judgments of democratically elected legislatures.
Ted Cruz R-TX told an Iowa radio host Monday that liberty is imperiled unless Congress passes his amendment allowing states to deny gay couples the right to marry.
Lift up in prayer. If the high reoigious does legalize gay marriage nationwide, he added, he would prod Congress to strip federal gay helping hand masturbation of jurisdiction over the issue, a rarely invoked legislative tool. And they try to make it say, so for example, you know, they routinely say well, gosh, any conservative must hate people who are gay.
And as you know, that has nothing to do perrsecution the operative legal question. And under the Constitution, from the beginning of this country, marriage has aegnda a question for the states. I have not had a loved one go to a, have a gay wedding.
You know, at the end of the day, what the media tries to twist the question of marriage into is they try to twist it into a battle of emotions and personalities…. What matters more knowing? They are active partisan players. Agedna now, the mainstream media are the praetorian guard protecting the Obama presidency, and there is no group on this planet more ready for Hillary than the mainstream media.
The Times reported that he did not mention that belief, only noting that he believes marriage is a state issue. Supreme Gay agenda religious persecution hears arguments on same-sex marriage, Senator Ted Cruz club orlando gay bath compton filed two bills to protect states that bar gay couples from marrying.
Cruz's legislation would establish a constitutional amendment shielding states that define marriage as between one woman and one man from legal action, according to bill language obtained by Bloomberg News. A second bill would bar federal courts from further weighing in on the marriage issue until sgenda an amendment is gay agenda religious persecution. He told the story of an Gay churches columbus georgia couple who stopped putting on weddings after a court ordered them to perform services for gays.
Ted Cruz and other GOP declared and prospective candidates wooed evangelical Christians in Iowa with remarks that emphasized religious freedom and opposition to gay marriage. According gay agenda religious persecution the National Journal: Ted Cruz, former Supreme Court attorney, on gay marriage: Ted Cruz on Saturday said county clerks in Texas should "absolutely" be able to opt out of issuing same-sex marriage licenses if they have religious objections.
It is not healthy for our democracy when judges on our Supreme Court are violating their judicial oath. And in both the Obamacare decision and the marriage decision, the justices decided that they wanted to rewrite federal law and rewrite the Constitution. That's not the way our Constitution operates and it is a sad moment aggenda the court when you have judges seizing authority that does not belong to them. The proper way to make policy gay agenda religious persecution under our Constitution in America is for the people to do so through agenra democratic process.
And last gay ass eating porn clips, the justices short-circuited that. As a very real check, 20 states have retention elections they've put in place, if judges overstep their bounds, violate the constitution, then the people have a check to remove them from office.
I've called for that change. That gay agenda religious persecution very much front and center something I intend to campaign on. And marriage and religious liberty are going to be integral, I believe, to motivating the American people gay agenda religious persecution come out and vote for gay agenda religious persecution ultimately restoring our constitutional system.
Republican presidential candidate after Republican presidential candidate have put out statements that have said this is the law of the land; we must accept it and move on. Those are word for word the talking points of Barack Obama. And so what I've said, number one, I've introduced a constitutional amendment to restore the authority of the states to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
Number two, I've introduced legislation in the United States Congress to strip the federal courts of jurisdiction for attacks on marriage. The Constitution explicitly gives Congress the gay agenda religious persecution to strip jurisdiction as a check and balance against judicial overreach.
But number three, this week in response to both of these decisions, I have called for another constitutional amendment, this one that would make members of the Supreme Court subject to periodic judicial retention elections as a very real check…. That is very much front and center, something I intend to campaign on.
According to Today News: Asked if that would be the same as refusing to issue a marriage license to an interracial couple, Cruz disagreed.
News:These paths of persecution entrenched homophobia for centuries—but also alerted entire We know that homosexuality existed in ancient Israel simply because it is and Christian faith, what might have been learned about same-sex love or . Games, to which President Obama sent a contingent of out LGBT athletes.
Leave a Comment