re: Respect for Marriage Act passed by Senate. Goes to House for final vote.

Just gathering more for my collection.

quote:

---

God forbid that we look at the actual language of the legislation, when arguing about what the legislation does.

---

No shite groomer... here is a section you seem to be avoiding:

quote:

---

SEC. 6. No impact on religious liberty and conscience.

---

quote:

---

(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.

---

Notice it DOES NOT INCLUDE individual companies in the regular market place. Only government approved non-profits and their employees.

It WILL make you bake a cake with messaging which you disagree with.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/8404/text

quote:

---

Divorce and remarriage is an invalid marriage in most cases and adultery. And marriage is between a man and a woman.

Read your Bible

---

This is a legal issue, not a religious one.

The language from that (or any other) religious text is utterly irrelevant.

They need to reform marriage instead

There should be a marriage license and you either renew or you dont

quote:

---

Notice it DOES NOT INCLUDE (in Section 6) individual companies in the regular market place.

---

of course not. That is obvious in the operative language itself, which I quoted.

quote:

---

Heterosexuals ruined the purity of marriage many many years ago. How many kids grow up in divorced families. How many straight marriages end due to adultery. A gay couple living together with a piece of paper that gives them the same legal rights that other tax payers receive doesn't effect anyone else. Sweep your own porch first hypocrites

---

Marriage, "real" marriage, between a man and a woman, was deemed to be good for the state. It usually resulted in creating new markets and consumers, and the tax breaks were intended to help offset costs of young families starting off.

The benefits of marriage (tax wise) has mostly disappeared, but gay couples will never experience what it's like to have a biological family and the immense bond for life that comes from that.

quote:

---

hmmm, a little bit of an odd reason but alright

---

It's also my last day of PTO so I dipped into the Sativa stash this morning IF you must know the truth.

quote:

---

Let me clear as a Gay man the drag queens educating children is disgusting and knowing the drug addled world of drag queens they should be no where near children.
As a Gay man I absolutely refuse to acknowledge that transgender is real. I don't care how many toxic medicine nor surgeries you have you will never be a gender you were not born as .

---

Upvote for you.

quote:

---

It goes further by enabling LGBT activists, who have already made a habit of exploiting the legal system to target religious Americans, and the politically motivated Department of Justice to bring civil action against anyone they say violates the terms of the legislation.

Under the guise of vague language, the RFMA could allow for the legal victimization of wedding vendors, adoption agencies, bakeries, and any other entities run by people of faith who refuse to offer services condoning same-sex marriage based on religious convictions.

---

I was told yesterday this abomination couldn't/wouldn't lead to religious persecution....

The gay mafia finna eat on destroying the religious.

So once this is signed by Biden surrounded by a bunch of figs, is it going to take a group to spend millions to fight it to SCOTUS to hope it gets overturned? Or could a state bring some kind suit as it will hurt the religious freedoms in state constitutions?

Let's not forget the left scoffed at the "vote of the people" of CA to get all this kicked off, and had to pass this in a transition window. That's what there garbage "democracy" looks like. F'em. I have no cares or respect for them so when pox comes down on them I won't care.

quote:

---

I wonder what my lesbian friends, that have been together for 30 years, think about that because both of their twins are also their biological children.


( Note: I only have 2 lesbian friends because lesbians are weird as F*CK.)

---

Technically those twins are partially their biological children and partially a donors. Two eggs don't make a baby.