Every Republican Pres. candidate denounces Supreme Court decision for marriage equality

  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Jun 27, 2015 4:48 AM GMT
    As much of the nation celebrated a historic step forward for equality, Republican presidential candidates denounced the Supreme Court's decision, and the GOP wants everyone to know that they will continue to bitterly fight against equality for gay Americans.

    Ted Cruz: "Today is some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation's history."

    Mike Huckabee: "I will not acquiesce to an imperial court any more than our Founders acquiesced to an imperial British monarch. We must resist and reject judicial tyranny, not retreat."

    Rick Santorum: "The stakes are too high and the issue too important to simply cede the will of the people to five unaccountable justices."

    Bobby Jindal: "Marriage between a man and a woman was established by God, and no earthly court can alter that.

    Scott Walker: "I believe this Supreme Court decision is a grave mistake. Five unelected judges have taken it upon themselves to redefine the institution of marriage."

    Ben Carson: "I strongly disagree with the Supreme Court's decision."

    Lindsey Graham: "I am a proud defender of traditional marriage."

    Jeb Bush: "I believe the Supreme Court should have allowed the states to make this decision."

    Marco Rubio: "This decision short-circuits the political process that has been underway on the state level for years. "While I disagree with this decision, we live in a republic and must abide by the law. As we look ahead, it must be a priority of the next president to nominate judges and justices committed to applying the Constitution as written and originally understood."
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 4:54 AM GMT
    Well we already knew Republicans hate gays, so this is to be expected. icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 5:09 AM GMT
    Art_Deco saidWell we already knew Republicans hate gays, so this is to be expected. icon_mad.gif



    Yeah, but now its just so, in your face, blatant, at least they are putting up a "united front" so nobody on their side appears to be too much off their rocker. I think Rubio's statement has given it away, if you read between his line, "their state by state agenda has been going on for years" (my guess its since GW Bush announced a constitutional amendment to protect marriage, 2004), now that its over, the truth is just coming out and their agenda has just collapsed or is severely broken.

    I am becoming a bit jittery about the American workplace now, do we now ask what the employers religious view is during an interview? I don't want to work for a bigoted company or management, since the republican and conservatives are making such a big deal over their religion icon_confused.gif



  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14385

    Jun 27, 2015 12:32 PM GMT
    Sadly if the GOP is not purged of all these narrow minded bible thumping screwballs, it will become totally irrelevant. Marco Rubio and Jeb Bush are the only candidates that although they disagree with the Supreme Court, they have pretty much faced the fact that gay marriage is protected by law. I think that both of them will gradually evolve and realize how wrong the right wing is about this issue. Time will only tell. All the other candidates are ignorant, bitter fucks who will most likely keep fighting a losing battle and making damned fools of themselves. The sad thing is that they are wrecking the GOP just to try to advance their blatant stupidity.
  • jeepguySD

    Posts: 651

    Jun 27, 2015 12:35 PM GMT
    What strikes me is how they all speak out of both sides of their mouths. They rail about abiding by the Constitution, and in the very same sentence seek to nullify the role of the *constitutional* court.

    The Framers *intended* for there to be separation of powers, with SCOTUS providing a check and balance against the executive and legislative branches of government.

    To my thinking, any candidate for the Chief Executive who refuses to abide by the Judicial has ipso facto forfeit the right to govern.

    The statements of Huckabee, Jindal, Walker, Santorum are blatantly dictatorial.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14385

    Jun 27, 2015 12:43 PM GMT
    jeepguySD saidWhat strikes me is how they all speak out of both sides of their mouths. They rail about abiding by the Constitution, and in the very same sentence seek to nullify the role of the *constitutional* court.

    The Framers *intended* for there to be separation of powers, with SCOTUS providing a check and balance against the executive and legislative branches of government.

    To my thinking, any candidate for the Chief Executive who refuses to abide by the Judicial has ipso facto forfeit the right to govern.

    The statements of Huckabee, Jindal, Walker, Santorum are blatantly dictatorial.
    Well that is exactly what Huckabee, Jindal, Santorum, and Walker want a dictatorship or more accurately a theocratic dictatorship similar to Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Iran. The only difference is those three nation-states are Muslim theocracies, the U.S. would be a Christian theocracy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 1:06 PM GMT
    I am not surprise to learn of the Republicans' negative position regarding gay marriages. Like so many major hurdles the minorities have overcome in the past; disgruntle comments are made from the opposing side. I remember my grandparents telling me about how automobiles were viewed as a "devils machine", how womens rights to vote was dimely viewed and Afican americans' were eroding at the fabric of our forfathers vision of a "united" states.

    These current negative coments towards the US Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage is an attempt I dare say, to attract voters to thier (republican) side; since the presidential election is around the corner??
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 1:06 PM GMT
    Of course the Republican Presidential candidates denounced the US Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. They are anti-gay, as they themselves proclaim.

    And anyone here on RJ who endorses & supports them also endorses their anti-gay policies, aimed directly at the members of this site. To hurt & demonize us.

    And I don't wanna hear this prevaricating crap about other issues being involved. If a Presidential candidate says he doesn't want you as a gay to have full civil rights, to remain a second-class citizen, then that's what he says.

    You can try to excuse it, rationalize it, equivocate it, but that's what he says. Accept that for yourself if you like, marginalize yourself if you want, but don't expect ME to accept that inferior position, nor will most of the guys here from the USA.

    Now we'll wait to hear from the RJ Right Wingers, to tell us why voting for candidates who want to strip away our US Constitutional civil rights is a good idea.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 1:17 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidOf course the Republican Presidential candidates denounced the US Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. They are anti-gay, as they themselves proclaim.

    And anyone here on RJ who endorses & supports them also endorses their anti-gay policies, aimed directly at the members of this site. To hurt & demonize us.

    And I don't wanna hear this prevaricating crap about other issues being involved. If a Presidential candidate says he doesn't want you as a gay to have full civil rights, to remain a second-class citizen, then that's what he says.

    You can try to excuse it, rationalize it, equivocate it, but that's what he says. Accept that for yourself if you like, marginalize yourself if you want, but don't expect ME to accept that inferior position, nor will most of the guys here from the USA.

    Now we'll wait to hear from the RJ Right Wingers, to tell us why voting for candidates who want to strip away our US Constitutional civil rights is a good idea.


    +1
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 2:52 PM GMT
    Art_Deco saidOf course the Republican Presidential candidates denounced the US Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. They are anti-gay, as they themselves proclaim.

    And anyone here on RJ who endorses & supports them also endorses their anti-gay policies, aimed directly at the members of this site. To hurt & demonize us.

    And I don't wanna hear this prevaricating crap about other issues being involved. If a Presidential candidate says he doesn't want you as a gay to have full civil rights, to remain a second-class citizen, then that's what he says.

    You can try to excuse it, rationalize it, equivocate it, but that's what he says. Accept that for yourself if you like, marginalize yourself if you want, but don't expect ME to accept that inferior position, nor will most of the guys here from the USA.

    Now we'll wait to hear from the RJ Right Wingers, to tell us why voting for candidates who want to strip away our US Constitutional civil rights is a good idea.



    +2!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 3:00 PM GMT
    funbud8 said
    Art_Deco saidOf course the Republican Presidential candidates denounced the US Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. They are anti-gay, as they themselves proclaim.

    And anyone here on RJ who endorses & supports them also endorses their anti-gay policies, aimed directly at the members of this site. To hurt & demonize us.

    And I don't wanna hear this prevaricating crap about other issues being involved. If a Presidential candidate says he doesn't want you as a gay to have full civil rights, to remain a second-class citizen, then that's what he says.

    You can try to excuse it, rationalize it, equivocate it, but that's what he says. Accept that for yourself if you like, marginalize yourself if you want, but don't expect ME to accept that inferior position, nor will most of the guys here from the USA.

    Now we'll wait to hear from the RJ Right Wingers, to tell us why voting for candidates who want to strip away our US Constitutional civil rights is a good idea.



    +2!

    +3
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jun 27, 2015 3:22 PM GMT
    jeepguySD saidWhat strikes me is how they all speak out of both sides of their mouths. They rail about abiding by the Constitution, and in the very same sentence seek to nullify the role of the *constitutional* court.

    The Framers *intended* for there to be separation of powers, with SCOTUS providing a check and balance against the executive and legislative branches of government.

    To my thinking, any candidate for the Chief Executive who refuses to abide by the Judicial has ipso facto forfeit the right to govern.

    The statements of Huckabee, Jindal, Walker, Santorum are blatantly dictatorial.


    That is a good point.

    Obviously there is a good reason for the separation of powers. If there were not a separation of powers, the result would be chaotic instability. The legislative and executive branches could influence the courts to interpret the Constitution any way they wanted to and the Constitution would mean nothing.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 4:42 PM GMT
    jeepguySD saidWhat strikes me is how they all speak out of both sides of their mouths. They rail about abiding by the Constitution, and in the very same sentence seek to nullify the role of the *constitutional* court...



    It's even crazier than that. Because they specify in their complaint that it was the 5 unelected justices against them, not the 4 unelected justices for them as if five were unelected but four were, what, chosen by the Republican electorate? They are so fucked up, so much conflicting compost in their minds that I don't know how it is that their heads don't spontaneously combust.

    A Republican finally comes to terms with himself
    tumblr_mtifx1UJoI1s5746vo1_500.gif
  • SkyMiles

    Posts: 963

    Jun 27, 2015 5:26 PM GMT
    I'm quite partisan but still surprised that there isn't even ONE republican candidate on the good side of this decision. You'd think there'd be at least ONE because of the sheer number of candidates running. It would certainly set them apart, give the socially-liberal republicans someone to get behind, not to mention the many religious denominations that currently support marriage equality.

    I mean, not even this year's "maverick" Rand Paul?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 5:35 PM GMT
    Colbert_Nation saidI'm quite partisan but still surprised that there isn't even ONE republican candidate on the good side of this decision. You'd think there'd be at least ONE because of the sheer number of candidates running. It would certainly set them apart, give the socially-liberal republicans someone to get behind, not to mention the many religious denominations that currently support marriage equality.

    I mean, not even this year's "maverick" Rand Paul?

    Yeah, not one. Playing to the politics of their homophobic "base", so they can win the nomination. What whores.
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Jun 27, 2015 6:27 PM GMT
    jeepguySD saidWhat strikes me is how they all speak out of both sides of their mouths. They rail about abiding by the Constitution, and in the very same sentence seek to nullify the role of the *constitutional* court.

    The Framers *intended* for there to be separation of powers, with SCOTUS providing a check and balance against the executive and legislative branches of government.

    To my thinking, any candidate for the Chief Executive who refuses to abide by the Judicial has ipso facto forfeit the right to govern.

    The statements of Huckabee, Jindal, Walker, Santorum are blatantly dictatorial.


    Republicans love to crow about how much they love the US Constitution... until confronted with a a Supreme Court decision they don't like -- then they're all for dumping the entire judiciary wing of our democracy, effectively flushing the Constitution down the toilet.
    But somehow it all makes sense in Red State Land. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Jun 27, 2015 6:49 PM GMT
    Of course the Republican Presidential candidates denounced the US Supreme Court ruling in favor of same-sex marriage. They are anti-gay, as they themselves proclaim.

    Of course: they only support the law and the constitution when it agrees with them. This is also true of criminals everywhere, who would be delighted to impeach judges who rule against them, or declare the courts invalid when they are convicted.

    Basically, it shows a deep disdain for the rule of law.

    But who's surprised?
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Jun 27, 2015 6:50 PM GMT
    JuanPablomv89 said
    Art_Deco saidWell we already knew Republicans hate gays, so this is to be expected. icon_mad.gif


    Thats why you got married to a woman living a fake heterosexual life until you turned 45?. What that FAT ass Hillary Clinton will do about it?. Only brainwashed gay men will vote for a hungry selfish thief fat woman

    You are the most anti gay person here. Men like you didnt do anything for the gay movements. Hope that Obama puppet dont cry like he always do


    Thank you for adding so much class to the discussion.
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Jun 27, 2015 6:58 PM GMT
    JuanPablomv89 said
    Art_Deco saidWell we already knew Republicans hate gays, so this is to be expected. icon_mad.gif


    Thats why you got married to a woman living a fake heterosexual life until you turned 45?. What that FAT ass Hillary Clinton will do about it?. Only brainwashed gay men will vote for a hungry selfish thief fat woman

    You are the most anti gay person here. Men like you didnt do anything for the gay movements. Hope that Obama puppet dont cry like he always do


    Another thoughtful and mature series of comments from you... just what we would expect.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 7:37 PM GMT
    The dumbass GOP are trying to make fun of Obama and Hilary for "evolving" on gay marriage.
    The real joke is the Repub party - which has yet to evolve AT ALL - and isn't offering up a single candidate for 2016 who doesn't advocate treating gay Americans as second class citizens.

    The Repubs just don't get - and we need to give them a good hard ass kicking in 2016.
    Maybe then they'll start to get the message.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 8:24 PM GMT
    tazzari said
    Of course: they only support the law and the constitution when it agrees with them. This is also true of criminals everywhere, who would be delighted to impeach judges who rule against them, or declare the courts invalid when they are convicted.


    4015967666_0305Putin_answer_1_xlarge.png
  • ASHDOD

    Posts: 1057

    Jun 27, 2015 9:12 PM GMT
    Colbert_Nation saidI'm quite partisan but still surprised that there isn't even ONE republican candidate on the good side of this decision. You'd think there'd be at least ONE because of the sheer number of candidates running. It would certainly set them apart, give the socially-liberal republicans someone to get behind, not to mention the many religious denominations that currently support marriage equality.

    I mean, not even this year's "maverick" Rand Paul?





    that is interesting, you would think at least one would jump on this golden opportunity to be diffrent, it could place him high enough for winning or at least a candidate for vice president, it seems they do hate us very much ,how sad.

    btw meanwhile here in Israel one politician got on the side of the good people from our defense minister [the second in importance in Israeli government] Moshe Ya'alon published a very supportive announcement in favor of gay marriage here in Israel too.
  • kentfrat1783

    Posts: 9

    Jun 27, 2015 9:27 PM GMT
    Of course the GOP is against this. Anything they didn't first "think of" they are against.

    And if they are against SCOTUS on this ruling, then aren't they also AGAINST SCOTUS rulings that were in their favor? Can't have it both ways but then again, they have learned how to talk multiple ways to get the most money to buy their elections.

    And from what they said, they want new people in place to interpret the Constitution to how it was "originally" intended. Unless the dead can be brought back to life that will never happen. They do their best to 'interpret" it with the lawsuit that was brought in front of them. How I interpret what the GOP wants in place, is those that will "do as they say and not have a checks and balance).


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jun 27, 2015 9:51 PM GMT
    KissTheSky saidRepublicans love to crow about how much they love the US Constitution... until confronted with a a Supreme Court decision they don't like -- then they're all for dumping the entire judiciary wing of our democracy, effectively flushing the Constitution down the toilet.
    But somehow it all makes sense in Red State Land. icon_rolleyes.gif


    The weird thing is how consistent they are in that "technique" of, I suppose, "argumentation", giving them every benefit of the doubt and then some.

    Which leads me to think that it isn't strategy on their part--though they might rationalize it thusly, thinking themselves clever, yikes--but rather, wiring. That's how their brains work and that falls in line very well with studies showing how few scientists (a concurrent thread shows 6% I think it was) have identified as Republican.

    How can they do science if evidence before them without changing changes? If there's no consistency of how evidence is approached & interpreted then where's the science? If they declare the problem is that liberal judges weren't elected but fail to notice that nor were conservative judges. How would an experiment utilizing their processes, their inputs, be repeatable by another group of scientists to test truth. Ya can't. It fails in reproducibility.

    So then how is it that they agree among themselves?

    Republicanism today is faith-based politics unquestioning of its own authority figures. And that's dangerous.
  • FRE0

    Posts: 4865

    Jun 27, 2015 10:14 PM GMT
    JuanPablomv89 said
    Art_Deco saidWell we already knew Republicans hate gays, so this is to be expected. icon_mad.gif


    Thats why you got married to a woman living a fake heterosexual life until you turned 45?. What that FAT ass Hillary Clinton will do about it?. Only brainwashed gay men will vote for a hungry selfish thief fat woman

    You are the most anti gay person here. Men like you didnt do anything for the gay movements. Hope that Obama puppet dont cry like he always do


    You may have to choose between Mrs. Clinton and some reactionary anti-gay Republican. Which would it be?