In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

47 House Republicans Who Voted to Legalize Same-Sex Marriage

serfserf Member Posts: 9,225 ✭✭✭✭

The Republican Rhino's come out of the closet? You can bet the country is never going to be the same. Soon the whole system will be trans humanism for all from A to Z.


Rep. Jody Hice, R-Ga., tweeted: “Today I voted NO on H.R. 8404, the ‘Respect for Marriage Act.’ It’s a slap in the face of our federalist system that is just the latest effort to impose their leftist agenda on the entire country.”


  • select-fireselect-fire Member Posts: 69,482 ✭✭✭✭

    Political preference has no limits..they are everywhere. A don't say a word about their beliefs or parades...

  • Mr. PerfectMr. Perfect Member, Moderator Posts: 63,772 ******

    The state should not be involved in marriage at all.

    Some will die in hot pursuit
    And fiery auto crashes
    Some will die in hot pursuit
    While sifting through my ashes
    Some will fall in love with life
    And drink it from a fountain
    That is pouring like an avalanche
    Coming down the mountain
  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 23,823 ******

    Agreed. However, I have had friends over the years who had "significant others". If a person can designate a wife or husband as a legal beneficiary, claim them on their taxes, etc., I have no issue with same sex unions for legal purposes.

    Having said that , I believe marriage is a union between a man and a woman.

  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 23,823 ******


    This is one of the subjects that former forum moderators and administrators deemed divisive and subject to being poofed.

    Tread lightly.

  • mike55mike55 Member Posts: 2,268 ✭✭✭✭

    It should be a STATE issue, not a federal law!

  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,127 ✭✭✭✭

    The Federal Government uses marital status in the tax code, SS survivor benefits and no doubt a number of other ways.

    This being the case, it needs to legally define marriage. A bunch of pseudo-conservatives seem to think they have the power to define it, but the privileges and immunities clause tells us otherwise.

    It is about freedom and Liberty, not your personal preference.

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
  • serfserf Member Posts: 9,225 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 18

    The Temple and The Palace is always involved in political endeavors. For thousand of years a marriage was between a man and woman until The supreme court ruled otherwise. A civil union with all rights and privileges is as far as they should had gone on this but they thought otherwise.

    Natural law can be denied with science thus Trans humanism is the new paradigm shift coming to society. The Republicans are just falling in line to survive in a two party system.


  • wifetrainedwifetrained Member Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭
    edited November 18

    I doubt it'll make thru the senate or has it already? This is a serious question as I have had enough of this subject being blathered about every GD night.

  • waltermoewaltermoe Member Posts: 850 ✭✭✭✭

    God created marriage not man. To claim a marriage is ok between two men or two woman is sacrilegious. Period!!!

  • hillbillehillbille Member Posts: 13,126 ✭✭✭✭

    I never understood the argument, I too think marriage should be man and woman. If it is equal rights for benefits, health, taxes, ect. just change the rules to make the " union" have the same legal meaning as marriage but let it be called a union, not a marriage.......

  • wifetrainedwifetrained Member Posts: 1,137 ✭✭✭

    Why are we forced to kowtow to an estimated 3% of the population?

  • BrookwoodBrookwood Member, Moderator Posts: 11,409 ******

    I have found that the gov't does not favor marriage rights much at all. Those living together without a marriage license get far many more benefits than those that follow the traditions of marriage!!

  • Don McManusDon McManus Member Posts: 23,127 ✭✭✭✭

    I agree 100% in principle, hillbillie.

    To do so, IMO, would require governments to change all reference of marriage to something on the order of ‘documented union’.

    I doubt this would fly with those big government consecutives who supported The Defense of Marriage Act.

    Freedom and a submissive populace cannot co-exist.

    Brad Steele
Sign In or Register to comment.