Knowledgeispower
Ah I love the smell of missile spam in the morning
Really surprised Romney was crazy enough to do that given where he's been elected from
Five minutes of hate news
- Thread starter PsihoKekec
- Start date
I'm convinced some of these people have a fetish for self debasement.
This shouldn't be a surprise to anyone after Justice Thomas made noises about revisiting Obergfell, even if the other Justice's didn't agree.
And at this point, I don't think anyone but the most hardcore parts of the Right have any problem with this legislation, because outside that fringe very few people have problems with same sex marriage.
And no, supporting same-sex marriage is not the same as supporting 'drag queen story hour' in the eyes of most of the American public, so that argment doesn't really hold much weight except to preach to the choir.
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
36 Senators voted against this, and you still say it's a 'fringe.' Even setting aside your lack of understanding of the basic moral principles involved, you're showing you're willfully blind here.
The law apparently withdraws a Church's tax protections if it doesn't marry homosexuals. A gun point coercion and a violation of the 1A.
I hope there's recall efforts on those senators
I hope there's recall efforts on those senators
LordsFire
Internet Wizard
Can you actually quote text on that?
Because if this is true, this is a big deal. A really big deal.
And that's before you go into whether or not people try to force the issue in mosques.
No, I'm just not going to pretend that this legislation is some horrible thing that deserves to be in this thread.
And yes, 36 R voted against it, because they are voting against most anything the Biden admin pushes.
This wouldn't be an issue if Justice Thomas hadn't made noises about revisiting Obergfell, thus spurring the Dems to codify same-sex marriage federally to pre-empt it.
You got a source for this?
Removing 1A protections/tax exemptions for churches is something that would not make SCOTUS happy, and would open the legislation up to other types of SCOTUS challenges.
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
From my reading of the text of the Bill, that is not the case. It includes specific languages to retain protection for churches.
SEC. 6. NO IMPACT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CONSCIENCE.
(a) In General.—Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to diminish or abrogate a religious liberty or conscience protection otherwise available to an individual or organization under the Constitution of the United States or Federal law.
(b) Goods Or Services.—Consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution, nonprofit religious organizations, including churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, nondenominational ministries, interdenominational and ecumenical organizations, mission organizations, faith-based social agencies, religious educational institutions, and nonprofit entities whose principal purpose is the study, practice, or advancement of religion, and any employee of such an organization, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage. Any refusal under this subsection to provide such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges shall not create any civil claim or cause of action.
That was an amendment that failed
See, this is what I had heard before, that the GOP had made sure language was put in that would protect religious liberty, and that is why it passed.
Ok, if that is the case, then can someone provide a updated version, and what amendments made it and what did not.
Because if the bill actually does strip tax exemptions from churches that won't preform same-sex marriages, that is a major Constitutional breach.
Bear Ribs
Well-known member
Um... it would not appear so from the text of the bill that passed.
Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 8404) entitled “An Act to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage, and for other purposes.”, do pass with the following
AMENDMENT:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the “Respect for Marriage Act”.
...
SEC. 6. NO IMPACT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CONSCIENCE.
Same-sex marriage protected under bill passed by U.S. Senate with GOP support - Kansas Reflector
The U.S. Senate approved legislation Tuesday that would enshrine protections for same-sex and interracial marriages, codifying many of the rights that would disappear if the U.S. Supreme Court were to overturn those landmark decisions the way it overturned the nationwide right to an abortion...
kansasreflector.com
I don't think any of us will miss Romney when he gets the boot.
This doesn't give full wording but summarizes additions and failed amendments.Same-sex marriage protected under bill passed by U.S. Senate with GOP support - Kansas Reflector
The U.S. Senate approved legislation Tuesday that would enshrine protections for same-sex and interracial marriages, codifying many of the rights that would disappear if the U.S. Supreme Court were to overturn those landmark decisions the way it overturned the nationwide right to an abortion...
Looks like the article references the same text @Bear Ribs cited, and the GOP amendments that were rejected had the issues they covered dealt with by the religious liberty amendment as a blanket 1A/religious liberty protection, instead of as specific issues amendments.
And that seems to be the bone of contention here. Will such an unspecific, blanket protection manage to cover all the possible avenues of very specific activist lawyer poking that will inevitably happen? Only time will tell.
Well, the wording doesn't leave a lot of room for interpretation, in that it says nothing in the bill is meant to impede or infringe on religious liberty protections that already exist under the Constitution.
Which means if someone tries to use this bill to screw with religious liberty, the case will likely fail if it gets to SCOTUS.
It gives no new powers to the states or gov, it just codifies Obergfell at the Congressional level, without impeding religious liberty.
Try to think like an exceptionally malicious lawyer for a moment and read it again while doing so...
mrttao
Well-known member
The sodomites proved over the past few years that the bible was right about them. I might be an atheist, but I can admit when I was wrong and the bible was right.
And you are wrong, supporting same sex marriage is exactly how we ended up with drag queen story hour.
No, how we end up with drag queen story hour is thanks to power pedo's like Epstein. Biden, Weinstein, and friends, along with the fucking doctors making bank off tran-ing people.
All of which was happening long before same-sex marriage was legalized.
Those types have just decided to try to take advantage of it, and guess what, their pushing pedo shit is helping turn a lot of normies against the Far-Left and people in power.
If the GOP just accepted same-sex marriage as settled law, and instead focused on dealing with the verifiable lies told about how men can be women or vice versa, it would help it's image with the center so much.
The center will not be convinced to remove same-sex marriage, but it might be convince that the lies about trans shit and denial of basic biology invalidates it's protected status along side LGBs.
The LGBs who want to push drag queen story hour, and still think near-pornographic 'Pride Parades' or 'LGBT+ elementary/middle school literature' are ok, those...if a classmate has two dads or two moms, and a kid wants to know why, that's for the parents to handle, not the teachers.