America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 23 months ago by 8trackdisco. 44 replies replies.
House to vote on Respect for Marriage Act in response to Clarence Thomas opinion
rfenst Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,323
“As this Court may take aim at other fundamental rights, we cannot sit idly by as the hard-earned gains of the Equality movement are systematically eroded,” Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), chair of the House Judiciary Committee and one of the bill’s sponsors, said Monday.


The Hill
A bipartisan group of lawmakers on Monday introduced legislation to officially repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and require federal recognition for same-sex and interracial marriages nationwide.

The measure’s introduction comes in response to an opinion by Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas last month following the court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, the landmark 1973 decision that established the constitutional right to an abortion.

Thomas wrote that the court’s “substantive due process precedents” set in cases like Obergefell v. Hodges — which legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states — should be revisited, creating widespread uncertainty and panic among same-sex married couples over whether their unions will continue to be recognized.

The Respect for Marriage Act, introduced Monday by top House and Senate Democrats, would repeal DOMA, the 1996 law that defined marriage as a union between one man and one woman. The Supreme Court in 2013 ruled that a section of the law preventing the government from recognizing same-sex marriages for the purposes of determining federal benefits was unconstitutional, but the remainder of the law is still technically in place, albeit unenforceable.

America is changing faster than ever! Add Changing America to your Facebook or Twitter feed to stay on top of the news.

The new legislation would also address a national patchwork of marriage laws by requiring states to legally recognize same-sex and interracial marriages if those marriages are valid in the states in which they were performed.

In more than 30 states, statutes or constitutional amendments prohibiting same-sex marriage remain on the books, threatening marriage equality in more than 60 percent of the country should Obergefell be overturned.

The bill is slated for a floor vote this week, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Monday.

“LGBTQ Americans and those in interracial marriages deserve to have certainty that they will continue to have their right to equal marriage recognized, no matter where they live, should the Court act on Justice Thomas’ draconian suggestion,” Hoyer said.

“If Justice Thomas’s concurrence teaches anything it’s that we cannot let your guard down or the rights and freedoms that we have come to cherish will vanish into a cloud of radical ideology and dubious legal reasoning,” House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), one of the bill’s sponsors, said Monday in a statement. “As this Court may take aim at other fundamental rights, we cannot sit idly by as the hard-earned gains of the Equality movement are systematically eroded.”

The Respect for Marriage Act has been introduced in several previous Congresses, beginning with a 2009 bill that was also backed by Nadler.

Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the measure’s GOP sponsor in the Senate, said the proposed legislation builds on previous victories like the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and is “another step to promote equality, prevent discrimination, and protect the rights of all Americans.”

The Respect for Marriage Act is co-led by members of the Congressional LGBTQ Equality Caucus including Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.), who despite being with his partner, Randy, for more than 30 years, has only been legally married to him for eight.

“For families like mine, the Respect for Marriage Act is a necessary step to protect our fundamental rights,” Maloney said Monday.
Culpepper76 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 07-13-2022
Posts: 6
Government should have zero involvement in marriage. Problem solved. If a couple wants to be married they could have a legal agreement drawn up with a lawyer to serve as a "legal marriage" certification for purposes of insurance etc.

Why the hell government needs to be involved is beyond me.
ZRX1200 Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,604
The government has no business in marriage if the couple is of legal age.
Stogie1020 Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 5,335
Did congress just realize they can pass laws? Maybe the House should put down the 64oz thirst buster of Jan 6 hearing, pick up a can of Tab and actually do some work that helps Americans.

DrafterX Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,551
Nadler just wants to be able to marry his cousins.. Mellow
rfenst Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,323
Culpepper76 wrote:
Government should have zero involvement in marriage. Problem solved. If a couple wants to be married they could have a legal agreement drawn up with a lawyer to serve as a "legal marriage" certification for purposes of insurance etc.

Why the hell government needs to be involved is beyond me.

Why require a lawyer and fees? No two agreements would be the same (unless the state were to mandate a form), which will cause chaos in the family court system. What if the lawyer does a crappy job with inadequate quality work? What if low quality work leaves divorcing parties in a mess on unequal ground with no laws as guidance? What is the judge supposed to do? Use their individual discretion? Is everyone supposed to go to court on their own? That's just crazy. Recipe for a mess.
Culpepper76 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-13-2022
Posts: 6
Why would two agreements need to be the same? Just a simple agreement stating they are now married and stipulations on property etc if divorced. You act as if the current government controlled way of things isn't a mess already or as if judges don't use personal discretion lol.
RayR Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,888
Congress has no business being involved in marriage one way or another. It is not a power delegated to the general government in the Constitution, therefore it is left to the individual states to deal with assuming their state constitutions allow it.
Mr. Jones Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,423
DrafterX and his "partner" ADROOMI
ARE
NOT
WORRIED
IN
THE
SLIGHTEST....

BWUHAHAHAHA!!!💄💄💍💍👨‍❤️‍👨👨‍❤️‍👨👨‍❤️‍👨👨‍❤️‍👨👨‍❤️‍👨👬👬👬👨‍❤️‍💋‍👨👨‍❤️‍💋‍👨👨‍❤️‍💋‍👨🕴️🕴️🕴️🕴️🕴️🕴️🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️
MACS Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,776
This falls into the NFG category for me... no f---s given.

Nutsack Nadler is just pandering. As usual. F--- that loser.
bgz Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
RayR wrote:
Congress has no business being involved in marriage one way or another. It is not a power delegated to the general government in the Constitution, therefore it is left to the individual states to deal with assuming their state constitutions allow it.


Yes... let the states be as discriminatory as they want because the founding fathers were racist d*cks... and that's how they wanted it.

I think you've been taking logic lessons from DG.
bgz Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
When ideologies are stretched to the extremities... then normal people look at you like you're dumb...

Or they join your dumb azz... one of the two.
RayR Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,888
Ben, I've noticed you've been drinking and smoking something in your peace pipe.
Whistlebritches Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
As stupid as this is ,it passed

https://dallasvoice.com/breaking-u-s-houses-passes-respect-for-marriage-act/

In my opinion this is democraps grasping at straws ...........they know how **** ed they are in the midterms.

First you brew up some bullschit after Roe v Wade is overturned..............then you stir that pot repeatedly and often til you can get enough idiots to follow you down the yellow brick road.Now that you have convinced the so called idiots you have a crisis you capitalize on it.

Never forget the democraps motto........."Never let a good crisis go to waste" especially now that they have learned to create them with just a wave of the magic wand
bgz Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Whistlebritches wrote:
As stupid as this is ,it passed

https://dallasvoice.com/breaking-u-s-houses-passes-respect-for-marriage-act/

In my opinion this is democraps grasping at straws ...........they know how **** ed they are in the midterms.

First you brew up some bullschit after Roe v Wade is overturned..............then you stir that pot repeatedly and often til you can get enough idiots to follow you down the yellow brick road.Now that you have convinced the so called idiots you have a crisis you capitalize on it.

Never forget the democraps motto........."Never let a good crisis go to waste" especially now that they have learned to create them with just a wave of the magic wand



No.... just no. I don't think you understand how f*cked you guys are in your beliefs...

The supreme court f*cked you guys over so hard, you're just too f*cking dumb to understand it.

Anyone with a half a brain can see how screwed you guys are.

Only way you can win now is if you cheat... like blatant dictatorship style cheating... only way.

I say you guys... I'm using a broad brush here, let's call you guys Stupid Conservatives and ReTrumpAgains... basically if you put an "R" next to your name... I don't think there's a such thing as a Republican anymore, at least not one that can win... only power tripping Trumpbags can win... because most of you are f*cking idiots... and that's just true... I can't sugar coat that.

He created a country of truth deniers... and to the rest of us non-ReTrumpAgains, you all really do look "special".


Stogie1020 Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 5,335
Just to be clear, bgz, you are saying that we are the dumb ones, yet you fell for the Russia hoax for two years. Hook line and sinker. You took the whole shaft all the way to the balls and begged for more. You probably still have the heartthrob posters of Schiff and Nadler in speedos on the ceiling above your bed.

Just saying.
bgz Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Stogie1020 wrote:
Just to be clear, bgz, you are saying that we are the dumb ones, yet you fell for the Russia hoax for two years. Hook line and sinker. You took the whole shaft all the way to the balls and begged for more. You probably still have the heartthrob posters of Schiff and Nadler in speedos on the ceiling above your bed.

Just saying.


Uh... I'm a non-ReTrumpAgain... that doesn't make me the other thing (if there were only 2 things)... except in a sense that's similar to RayR... either you're with us or your against us type mentality...

Which is a ReTrumpAgain outlook, so I can see why you think that.
Whistlebritches Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 04-23-2006
Posts: 22,128
bgz wrote:
No.... just no. I don't think you understand how f*cked you guys are in your beliefs...

The supreme court f*cked you guys over so hard, you're just too f*cking dumb to understand it.

Anyone with a half a brain can see how screwed you guys are.

Only way you can win now is if you cheat... like blatant dictatorship style cheating... only way.

I say you guys... I'm using a broad brush here, let's call you guys Stupid Conservatives and ReTrumpAgains... basically if you put an "R" next to your name... I don't think there's a such thing as a Republican anymore, at least not one that can win... only power tripping Trumpbags can win... because most of you are f*cking idiots... and that's just true... I can't sugar coat that.

He created a country of truth deniers... and to the rest of us non-ReTrumpAgains, you all really do look "special".




Everybody gotta have a dream...........an LSD infused wild assed dream
DrMaddVibe Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,431
Stogie1020 wrote:
Just to be clear, bgz, you are saying that we are the dumb ones, yet you fell for the Russia hoax for two years. Hook line and sinker. You took the whole shaft all the way to the balls and begged for more. You probably still have the heartthrob posters of Schiff and Nadler in speedos on the ceiling above your bed.

Just saying.



POST OF THE WEEK CANDIDATE!Herfing
DrafterX Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,551
I seem to remember the majority of the peoples in California saying hell no to gay-homos getting married and stuff... 5th circuit said screw the peoples... This isn't very American .... Mellow
CelticBomber Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Stogie1020 wrote:
Just to be clear, bgz, you are saying that we are the dumb ones, yet you fell for the Russia hoax for two years. Hook line and sinker. You took the whole shaft all the way to the balls and begged for more. You probably still have the heartthrob posters of Schiff and Nadler in speedos on the ceiling above your bed.

Just saying.


Well, you did fall for the whole Iraq invasion because of WMD's that they knew weren't there. How many U.S. servicemen died for that lie?

Still have your Bush - Cheney posters on your wall?


You're all insane. No one listens to people who actually know what's going on because they're "Fake News" unless it's news you happen to agree with but, somehow, you guys have it all figured out.
CelticBomber Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
DrafterX wrote:
I seem to remember the majority of the peoples in California saying hell no to gay-homos getting married and stuff... 5th circuit said screw the peoples... This isn't very American .... Mellow



People also said:

Don't take my slaves.
Don't let women vote.
Don't grant equal rights.
Etc.
DrafterX Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,551
They were just kiddin.. Mellow
HockeyDad Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,134
CelticBomber wrote:
People also said:

Don't take my slaves.
Don't let women vote.
Don't grant equal rights.
Etc.


Those were all Democrats saying that!
Stogie1020 Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 5,335
CelticBomber wrote:
Well, you did fall for the whole Iraq invasion because of WMD's that they knew weren't there. How many U.S. servicemen died for that lie?

Still have your Bush - Cheney posters on your wall?


You're all insane. No one listens to people who actually know what's going on because they're "Fake News" unless it's news you happen to agree with but, somehow, you guys have it all figured out.


Man, you had to go back 30+ years for that one... Well done.

bgz Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Stogie1020 wrote:
Man, you had to go back 30+ years for that one... Well done.



Ya, now they lie about anything and everything... They're worse than democrats now.

We got a choice between sh*tty and sh*ttier... Aren't choices great?
burning_sticks Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 08-17-2020
Posts: 152
Marriage was established by God to be between a man and a woman, my freedom of religion is being encroached upon by the government of it requires me or my business to "endorse" any other form.
rfenst Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,323
burning_sticks wrote:
Marriage was established by God to be between a man and a woman, my freedom of religion is being encroached upon by the government of it requires me or my business to "endorse" any other form.

Why do you want to impose your religious beliefs on others who don't share them? No endorsement necessary, just ignore other people.
DrafterX Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,551
Unless you own a bakery or somethin.. Mellow
rfenst Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,323
Culpepper76 wrote:
Why would two agreements need to be the same? Just a simple agreement stating they are now married and stipulations on property etc if divorced. You act as if the current government controlled way of things isn't a mess already or as if judges don't use personal discretion lol.


1) Judicial economy and consistent rulings for child support and alimony.
2) All one has to do is file a form. No skin off anyone's @ss, especially if the couple wants to file joint tax returns.
3) Divorce laws and alimony and child support guidelines can be applied identically across the board for all to be treated
"equally."
4) If you want to control how a divorce could play out, spend YOUR money and get a pre-nup.
5) What you propose is no different than what we have now. No such thing as a simple marital and divorce agreement,
unless it's a standardized form.
burning_sticks Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 08-17-2020
Posts: 152
rfenst wrote:
Why do you want to impose your religious beliefs on others who don't share them? No endorsement necessary, just ignore other people.

I don't have or want the power to impose my beliefs, can't be done, they must be freely chosen. Power to enforce something I don't believe is granted to the government. Endorsement? See the many law suits that are imposed on people only trying to make a living and maintain their deeply held convictions, by persons that don't share them.

CelticBomber Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
Stogie1020 wrote:
Man, you had to go back 30+ years for that one... Well done.


Didn't realize there was an expiration date on lies that got lots of people killed. But, let's go back just a week. A 10 year old girl is raped and has to travel from Ohio to Indiana to get an abortion. You had Republicans calling the story a flat out lie and the Republican AG goes on Fox News and say's Dr. Caitlin Bernard is an "abortion activist acting as a doctor," saying that "from what we can find out so far, this Indiana abortion doctor has covered this up." he then went on to blame this on Biden's policies at the border because they're illegals and this is all Biden's fault. Except these people have been in the country longer than Biden has been President. That recent enough for you?
CelticBomber Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 05-03-2012
Posts: 6,786
burning_sticks wrote:
I don't have or want the power to impose my beliefs, can't be done, they must be freely chosen. Power to enforce something I don't believe is granted to the government. Endorsement? See the many law suits that are imposed on people only trying to make a living and maintain their deeply held convictions, by persons that don't share them.


So the government shouldn't be able to ban abortions.
burning_sticks Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 08-17-2020
Posts: 152
CelticBomber wrote:
So the government shouldn't be able to ban abortions.

Not the Federal government, like marriage it should properly be a function for my state to rule on, then I'm free to move to another that more closely aligns. Having lived in Europe and Asia for several years each I really can't see going back permanently.



Major Boobage Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 07-18-2022
Posts: 232
I think you all should be able to marry each other and stand behind you in solidarity. Do not let the government interfere with your choice for love or your ability to pick and choose when you’re for big government versus small government depending on what benefits you.

Keep up the good fight and claim to be conservatives while still practicing your same-sex love with each other
bgz Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Major Boobage wrote:
I think you all should be able to marry each other and stand behind you in solidarity. Do not let the government interfere with your choice for love or your ability to pick and choose when you’re for big government versus small government depending on what benefits you.

Keep up the good fight and claim to be conservatives while still practicing your same-sex love with each other


Well spoken!

They often find themselves behind each other with solidarity, they should be proud!
Major Boobage Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 07-18-2022
Posts: 232
Quit talking to me. I already know what I think. I am you after all.
bgz Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
I think I might need a specialist... Preferably one with big boobs.
Major Boobage Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 07-18-2022
Posts: 232
And a bigger wiener.
bgz Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Shhhh... You're not supposed to tell them that.
Major Boobage Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-18-2022
Posts: 232
They are too stupid to see what’s right in front of them, I wouldn’t worry about it
bgz Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 07-29-2014
Posts: 13,023
Ya, I'm probably right about that, they are pretty stupid.
Major Boobage Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 07-18-2022
Posts: 232
What you have to worry about is what Alex Jones tells them. Anything contrary they don’t hear. It’s their deep thinking and individual thought process.

Polly want a crackah?
8trackdisco Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 11-06-2004
Posts: 60,076
With an over 50% divorce rate, they really misnamed this one.
Users browsing this topic
Guest