The Harris/Biden Administration: Coming Together to Build Back Better
- Thread starter HFrog1999
- Start date
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
I'm definitely behind the times. Had to google it. Too much time watching TCU football related material lately!Your behind the times.
It’s drag queen story hour.
An-Cap Frog
Member
What a dick...
www.thesmokinggun.com
Dildon't: Man Busted For Striking Girlfriend With Sex Toy During Motel Argument
During an argument early Thanksgiving morning, a Florida Man threw a sex toy at his girlfriend, leaving the woman with a bruise on her torso, according to cops who noted that they did not confiscate
www.thesmokinggun.com
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
Somehow I missed that on MSM.
HFrog1999
Member
More pervert behavior normalized by Democrats.
Paul in uhh
Active Member
gohornedfrogs
Tier 1
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
Frog-in-law1995
Active Member
Bob Sugar
Active Member
LOL. I already forgot about the Trump stolen nuclear codes story.
AroundWorldFrog
Full Member
And the Pelosi two dudes with hammers while in their underwear story.
Eight
Member
were the cubans able to provide picture id's?
froginmn
Full Member
The Pelosi attack story sure did get quiet...
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
/cloudfront-us-east-2.images.arcpublishing.com/reuters/PSUVK7ZUZVNGDALHP4KKRJCWSE.jpg)
U.S. Senate passes same-sex marriage protection bill
The U.S. Senate passed a bill on Tuesday that would protect federal recognition of same-sex marriage, a measure taken up in response to worries the Supreme Court could overturn a 2015 decision that legalized it nationwide.
Why didn’t more Republicans vote for the bill? Seems like a fairly non controversial bill to me at this point. State rights argument I guess? Or is the argument that it is not needed with the SC decision? But then why vote against it in that case?
Jet Set Frog
Full Member
It's largely due to the risk to/open door to further negative impact to religious liberties and continued risk to the traditional nuclear family. Also, I don't think you can make an argument that there isn't much of a barrier keep going to go from where this takes us to legal polygamous marriages and beyond.U.S. Senate passes same-sex marriage protection bill
The U.S. Senate passed a bill on Tuesday that would protect federal recognition of same-sex marriage, a measure taken up in response to worries the Supreme Court could overturn a 2015 decision that legalized it nationwide.www.reuters.com
Why didn’t more Republicans vote for the bill? Seems like a fairly non controversial bill to me at this point. State rights argument I guess? Or is the argument that it is not needed with the SC decision? But then why vote against it in that case?
KillerFrog InD KitchenSink
Active Member
They did address the religious liberties concerns in an amendment to the bill. Here is Shelly Moore Capito's statement (who did vote for the bill):
Capito Votes to Advance Consideration of the Respect for Marriage Act, Plans to Support Substitute Amendment | U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) released the below statement after...
“I appreciate my fellow West Virginians who have reached out to me regarding the sanctity of marriage, and hold sincere beliefs based on strong traditional and religious values. These convictions must be respected, and no religious entity should be persecuted by any individual, organization, or government institution for the beliefs they hold.
“As such, this piece of legislation ensures all religious liberty and conscience protections provided to religious organizations under the Constitution and existing federal law, such as the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Non-profit religious organizations will not be required to provide any support for same-sex marriage, or see their benefits, rights, or status, altered when these rights do not arise from the specific issue of marriage.
“This legislation will allow those who have entered into a civil partnership since the Supreme Court’s 2015 ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges, to continue to have their partnerships respected for federal benefit purposes. This does not lessen the traditional sanctity of marriage or jeopardize the freedom of religious institutions. The House-passed legislation raised concerns among many about protecting religious freedoms, which is why my colleagues and I worked to strengthen those protections in the substitute amendment. I will be supporting the substitute amendment because it will ensure our religious freedoms are upheld and protected, one of the bedrocks of our democracy.”
