SSM bill passes the Senate 61-36

V

vibise

Well-known member
The bill also includes protections for interracial marriage but has carve outs for religions that have problems with homosexuality.

12 Republicans voted with the majority, and no Dems voted against the bill.

There were 3 who did not vote: Ben Sasse, Raphael Warnock, Pat Toomey.

McConnell voted against it even though he is in an interracial marriage.

The bill now goes back to the House, and then on to Biden.
 
Since 12 Republicans voted for it, Republicans seem to be more tolerent than Deocrats
 
vibise said:
The bill also includes protections for interracial marriage but has carve outs for religions that have problems with homosexuality.

12 Republicans voted with the majority, and no Dems voted against the bill.

There were 3 who did not vote: Ben Sasse, Raphael Warnock, Pat Toomey.

McConnell voted against it even though he is in an interracial marriage.

The bill now goes back to the House, and then on to Biden.
Click to expand...
I think the concession to religious groups that hate gay people is that they shouldn’t be required to perform gay marriages.

I don’t think anyone should be forced to perform any marriage.
 
vibise said:
The bill also includes protections for interracial marriage but has carve outs for religions that have problems with homosexuality.

12 Republicans voted with the majority, and no Dems voted against the bill.

There were 3 who did not vote: Ben Sasse, Raphael Warnock, Pat Toomey.

McConnell voted against it even though he is in an interracial marriage.

The bill now goes back to the House, and then on to Biden.
Click to expand...
Completely irrelevant, most likely - the right-wing House will probably shoot it down.

And the executive branch can't "reverse veto" a bill that didn't pass.
 
Backup said:
I think the concession to religious groups that hate gay people is that they shouldn’t be required to perform gay marriages.

I don’t think anyone should be forced to perform any marriage.
Click to expand...
Idiocy. No one hates gay people. I have gay people in my family. I don't care if someone is gay, but I don't have to agree with that lifestyle. That doesn't mean I hate gay people.
 
Backup said:
that a pretty dumb comment, considering what they were voting on
Click to expand...
When intolerance is defined as “any disagreement at all with my “enforced tolerant” view,” you’re right, Professor. It’s dumb. You clearly have the credentials to know and understand dumb and to redefine “tolerant.”

You do realize that there might be tolerant individuals who, cognizant of what the constitution protects, might suggest that gay marriage is antithetical to securing the blessings of Liberty unto our posterity, right? Or did you miss that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: BMS
Backup said:
that a pretty dumb comment, considering what they were voting on
Click to expand...
Depends what you think of the issue they were voting on. I think you were assuming you would be right about it.
I think it shows that some Republicans thought well if they want it let them have what they want and all Democrats though the other side arent going to get what they want.
 
Eightcrackers said:
This is idiocy.
Click to expand...
Outside of this forum, yes of course. Here however we have people claimimg that if someone doesnt agree with same sex acts they must hate the people, whereas they dont apply that logic to disagreement for any other behaviour. That is the alarming vindictive and controlling and enforcing mindset of the cultural marxism
 
tbeachhead said:
You do realize that there might be tolerant individuals who, cognizant of what the constitution protects, might suggest that gay marriage is antithetical to securing the blessings of Liberty unto our posterity, right? Or did you miss that?
Click to expand...
How does gay marriage in any way negatively affect the United States' posterity?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top