Do you support a gay marriage ban?

Question

Ted Cruz says Supreme Court was ‘clearly wrong’ with 2015 same-sex marriage ruling

Sen. Ted Cruz said the Supreme Court was off base in 2015 for its ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges that legalized same-sex marriage and believes it should be reconsidered.

"I think that decision was clearly wrong when it was decided," Cruz said on his podcast published Sunday, Verdict With Ted Cruz. "It was the court overreaching.

"Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, ignored two centuries of our nation’s history. Marriage was always an issue that was left to the states. We saw states before Obergefell, some states were moving to allow gay marriage, other states were moving to allow civil partnerships. There were different standards that the states were adopting."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This year 162 Republican bills have targeted LGBTQ. Do you believe Republicans are going to ban gay marriage?

NamerOfStars · Accepted Answer

They CAN'T ban gay marriage. I don't know what's so hard to understand about this, but overturning a Supreme Court ruling like Obergefell wouldn't be "banning" anything; just leaving it up to individual states. If the ruling DOES get overturned (which could only be done by the court, and only when it agrees to hear a relevant lawsuit; Ted Cruz really couldn't do much about it), then you'd have legislators able to act, but not before.

With that said- hell, no, I don't support it. In purely practical terms, marriage holds couples together like nothing else can. Unlike a lot of those raging against it, I actually TALKED to gay marriage advocates, back in the day, and it became *quite* clear that it wasn't a case of "crazed deviants wanting to destroy traditional marriage to deny its benefits to 'proper' WASPy Americans", but "people who were homosexual seeing the benefits of marriage and wanting in". Arguments that it would somehow damage "the sanctity of marriage", in the land of Elizabeth Taylor and Larry King, who between them had more rings than all the New England Patriots COMBINED (well, maybe not, but you get the point), are just laughable. What kind of magical anti-sanctity powers do you think gay people HAVE, that they could inflict harm that the Britney Spears-style 24-hour InstaMarriage couldn't?

Fun related fact: in 2003, the Episcopal Church appointed Gene Robinson as a bishop; the first openly gay bishop not only in the Church's history, but in the history of ANY mainstream Christian denomination (so far as I know). And critics responded, bizarrely, by calling this "an attack on traditional Christian marriage". To clarify: this was NOT the Episcopal Church approving of gay marriage; just appointing a gay bishop. And since Episcopal bishops can't marry, this was, in fact, taking a gay guy OUT of the marriage pool, so I have no idea what the connection was (since I'm not aware of anything in their cannons which says a marriage *officiated* by a gay person is invalid), but that was the line I heard over and over and over again. My response (which made my mother laugh until she fell out of her chair) was to say "Well, I'm just glad the Church's founder, Henry VIII, and his wife, Catherine of Aragon, and his wife, Anne Boleyn, and his wife, Jane Seymour, and his wife, Anne of Cleves, and his WIFE, Catherine Howard, and HIS WIFE, Catherine Parr, aren't around to see this horrible assault on traditional Christian marriage.".

Chazmatazz269 · Accepted Answer

I would not support a ban on gay marriage. However, Cruz has a point. Marriage isn’t mentioned once in the US Constitution. That’s not what it’s there for, not even close. However, proponents have the benefit of knowing that the 14th amendment constitutionally prevents laws against marriages of any type if there are laws in support of marriages of any types.
Let’s have a look:
“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”

So, in absolutely no uncertain terms, they can’t end gay marriages unless they end all marriages. This should be a good litmus test. How badly do they want to end gay marriage? And how important is the US Constitution to them when it protects people with whom they disagree? I’m very interested in what happens next. I probably don’t have enough popcorn. Ell oh ell!

Bratsondanielle · Accepted Answer

I mean I would love to say no, I think gays should be able to marry, and basically I do. But I'm honestly leaning toward the "it was wrong to say yes " because of WHERE IT WENT!! I have nothing against normal people who are homosexual, and kinda just keep it to themselves, and they can get married for all I care. I think, in hindsight, it shouldn't have been allowed, because it sparked the avalanche that became the insanity of the lgqbcdef2k+ community and 115 genders and different pronounce and commercials for "pride" on TV, and it's just going more and more insane

MzAsh · Accepted Answer

The fact that anyone actually wishes or motions to ban two gay people from marrying each other is beyond unreasonable and degenerate.

Anonymous · Answer

I do not support “a ban” and I am conservative. But similar to roe vs Wade the Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision superceded state constitutions.

That in itself isn’t constitutional. Reason being the United States was intentionally founded to avoided centralized federal power that dictates national wide mandates. That is giving too much power to the executive branch.

Now I know that’s not what leftists want to hear. But I have to ask you something. Why are you so obsessed about what laws Texas and Mississippi make if you live in NY or California? People living in Texas aren’t obsessed about laws California makes. Why is it you have to cram down your radical laws nationwide?

Anyway I could seriously care less what two consenting adults do in the bedroom. But the whole Obergefell v. Hodges opened the door to all sorts of twisted insanity. Like attacking Christian owned businesses because they won’t make cakes for gay couples or worse pushing “trans” education on children.

SecretsofKB · Answer

Gay woman here. After Roe v. Wade, I got to see just how many people on here don't think women should have rights over their own bodies.

Now, with the possibility that I won't be able to marry the the woman I love? That is denying me and other gay U. S. CITIZENS of rights. Rights that every other citizen is entitled to.

The hate that I see on this site. It is rampant and encouraged after Roe v. Wade. Combine that with anonymity and you get to see what people really think of me just trying to be happy and mind my own business.

I have a good job the provides a service to society. I pay my taxes. I don't break laws. I don't go around spreading hate or discontent. I don't try to convert anyone to anything.

Why don't I deserve to be happy? Your religious beliefs? They should have bearing on how I'm governed or how I get to live my life.

Aerissa_Jade · Answer

Sort of but not really, I support a government should get the F out of the marriage business, at all levels. State, federal and whatever. Marriage should be between two or more people and whoever is a consenting adult and the government should have no say in it.

If someone wants to marry same gender, their business. Not the governments, if someone wants to marry two wives or two husbands or any kind of poly relationship, same situation.

Let adults love and be with who they want to be with, no government permission needed.

ChrisMaster69 · Answer

It’s stupid to have one and this is that slippery slope with US Civil Rights law.

https://www.dol.gov/agencies/oasam/civil-rights-center/statutes/civil-rights-act-of-1964

This was always going to be a target, yes it will get pushed down to State level and I imagine those same states with hard abortion laws will also ban civil rights for gay, lesbian citizens.

The next target will be race, colour and those same states will also seek to change civil rights for anyone fitting that bill.

As soon as a country messes with its civil rights, it’s heading to the abyss.

monorprise · Answer

If Marriage is about "love" of the parties involved rather than securing the future of the children they create then the legal institution and license is as undesirable as it is pointless.

Such a pointless to everyone else, and frankly unnecessary to the parties institution should be totally abolished. Nobody should need a license to "love" ever.

That said Children unlike the parents who created them do in fact need Marriage to secure the support of both father and mother. So an alternate institution designed around Children should be re-created, if we wish to relate it to its historic counter part it should be called "marriage".

supercutebutt · Answer

Republicans claim to be for freedom and small government. They are the opposite. In every way. Everything about them is a lie. They literally want to look up inside snatches of American women to see what is or what isn't up there. They say they believe in the Constitution and yet wanted to throw out votes so Trump could become a dictator. Republicans are for gun murders and destroying freedom and giving tax breaks to billionaires. That's it.

Vote out EVERY Republican on every ballot except perhaps the VERY few who were vocally and angrily against Trump's traitorous bullshit. :)

genericname85 · Answer

yes i do. not because i don't want gay people to be happy together. it's simply about the word for me. marriage is the unification of 2 different things. like a chassis and the motor is called marriage. not attaching a motor to another motor or a chassis to another chassis. get what i'm saying? for me, marriage is exclusively for men and women. not gay people or all those other sexual identities that exist today. i'm all for them having a similar thing though i disagree with calling that marriage.

JDavid25 · Answer

Like Roe V Wade, this says nothing about banning "Gay Marriage" more about it not being in the constitution and being thrown back to the states to decide what they want.. Nice wording of it.. Has nothing to do with banning.. With that said, no I don't support actually banning it..

DaveJord · Answer

I do not support LGBTQ but I hate any law that limits the freedom of choice or self determination. Honestly this a huge deflect and distract tactic... so you we argue over BS like this so that they can get away with out really doing anything about immigrations, infrastructure and economic issue.

anon1903 · Answer

Of course not.

Because A. Gay couples adopt babies that ARE ALREADY THERE and give orphans a new life. & B. Because they can't reproduce. It's the best. Planet Earth is already trashed with human beings, the overpopulation is messing up with resources and economy.

#GaysAreTheBest #YouCantChangeMyMind

torossia1171 · Answer

Marriage in a normal proper sense is between a man and a woman. This whole neo liberal acceptance of homosexuality that's being forced on the non western world uninvited is a western attempt to degenerate nations like Russia or China or North Korea in the same way that western neo liberalism has wrecked the west today socially and technically.

AviatorTom · Answer

I have nothing against a same-sex relationship but I've never been in favor of calling that "marriage", which IMHO is between a man and a woman.

I think SCOTUS made a mistake when it said that same-sex marriages are a constitutional right several years go, but I'm not sure it makes to rescind that... let's just move on.

Guy__ · Answer

There is something to both sides.
What is the point of a gay marriage? It's nonsensical in my opinion.
But no government should own your body, your right to do whatever you want without harming others. If they do, it's called slavery.
I'm against slavery, so no, I do not support the ban.

PolyGamer · Answer

Marriage is a heterosexual culture, and if gays want to be respected, they need to respect those cultures around them rather than mess with their traditions which is akin to flipping the bird and disrespecting their pride.

Imagine if I took the pride flag and stuck a straight flag on it just because I can lol.

If you want them to see you as a human being, you need to see them as one.

NewsReader · Answer

I am a republican but I do not support banning gay marriage or interracial marriage. I am not a fsn of gay but if two people love each other then go and get married. But I hope they don't raise any kids. That would be bad for the kids. And there is nothing wrong with interracial marriage. If I was on the supreme court I would vote against this ban.

jshm2 · Answer

The problem isn't gays, abortions or whatever, it's weak laws that they don't have control over profiting from.

That is what the Republicans are targeting. They couldn't give a shit if necrophilia was legalised. They want to have their backers able to profit from the laws.

SiberFox · Answer

What is the point of two gays marrying each other? There isn't. The only reason is for tax breaks but thats meant for children. Since two guys or two girls can't have children they shouldn't be able to get married. As for adoption, a nuclear family is best.

AmandaYVR · Answer

I disagree with a ban. It's so stupid. What these Republicans don't comprehend, or agree with, is that other peoples' love doesn't devalue their own, just because they think it's different. It's not. Love is love.

Cubus · Answer

It should be a repeled on the same reason Roe vs Wade was repeled - there's nothing, even indirect, about it in US constitution. So, based on the 10th amendment, it should be left for each state to decide. Otherwise you stand against constitution.

007kingifrit · Answer

it's been less than 10 years since we let them out of the closet and now e are arguing about what a woman is and if children should perform in strip clubs

tolerant societies do not last, only hate builds happy societies. lock them up, execute them, or at minimum don't allow them to publicly display anything

Do you support a gay marriage ban?

Most Helpful Opinions

What Girls & Guys Said