The news today is that Chuck Schumer is scheduling a procedural vote tomorrow that would ultimately allow passage of the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act” that codifies same-sex marriage into federal law.
The scuttlebutt is that some Republicans are floating one or more amendments that would strengthen religious liberty protections. Since the Supreme Court wrote law several years ago that required the states to allow same-sex marriage, there has been a concerted attack on orthodox Christians from various denominations who believe in traditional, biblical marriage. Indeed, it has been a bloodbath that the progressive/socialist left– and the religious left– have been eager to facilitate. But the dark side has also attacked Christian institutions and businesses.
A couple of articles suggest that a number of Republicans are getting ready to vote in favor of this bill. That might include our own Senator Thom Tillis from North Carolina. But there are others– Collins, Murkowski, Portman, Romney and even Ron Johnson.
The socialists need ten GOP votes for overcome the filibuster.
There are doubts, however, that these amendment(s) to preserve religious liberty will do the job. The content of the amendment(s) is not being reported.
The overarching GOP posture of surrender and betrayal is an omnipresent reality. That is one of the reasons I left the Republican Party years ago to join the Constitution Party. Let’s see what happens tomorrow, and pray for the best.
16 thoughts on “Republicans Primed to Support Same-Sex Marriage Bill in US Senate”
Yes ! Pray for the best. What an abomination this bill is. Let’s count on some God fearing GOPers to kill this awful POS. ( sorry for the French )
I don’t think Schumer will proceed with a vote unless he is convinced he HAS the votes. And the content of these magical religious liberty amendments that would theoretically secure GOP support remains a mystery.
Mormon church announces support for same-sex marriage bill
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints on Tuesday came out in support of a proposed law that would protect same-sex marriages.
Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) has teed up a vote this week on the bill, dubbed the Respect for Marriage Act, after a bipartisan group of senators unveiled a deal that updated language to assuage GOP members on religious liberty concerns.
“The doctrine of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints related to marriage between a man and a woman is well known and will remain unchanged,” the church said in a statement.
“We are grateful for the continuing efforts of those who work to ensure the Respect for Marriage Act includes appropriate religious freedom protections while respecting the law and preserving the rights of our LGBTQ brothers and sisters,” the statement continued. “We believe this approach is the way forward.”
The statement marks a shift from 2008, when the church heavily supported efforts to pass Proposition 8 in California, which required the state to recognize only marriages between a man and a woman in attempts to prevent officials from granting same-sex marriage licenses.
After it was delayed until following the midterm elections, a group of five senators — Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) — released an updated version of the Respect for Marriage Act on Monday, signaling they had enough votes to break the Senate filibuster.
Efforts to pass the legislation came after the Supreme Court struck down abortion protections in late June.
Justice Clarence Thomas indicated in a concurring opinion that he believed the court should examine other cases rooted in the same constitutional issue as the abortion case, including the court’s landmark Obergefell v. Hodges 2015 decision that struck down same-sex marriage bans nationwide.
The bill would require the federal government to recognize a marriage if it was valid in the state where it was performed and guarantee that valid marriages are given full faith and credit in other states.
The senators also indicated the new version of the bill would clarify religious freedom protections, including language confirming that nonprofit religious organizations would not be required to provide any services or facilities for a marriage.
To pass the Senate, the bill would need the support of 10 Republicans, assuming all Democrats vote to support the legislation.
The House earlier this year passed a slightly different version of the bill, which was supported by almost 50 House Republicans.
The Mormon church is one of many that have been corrupted. As I have posted here recently, even some evangelicals have joined the fray. And of course the liberal mainline denominations and the progressive/socialist Jewish movements in the US have been fully on board. What has happened to our country? God is in the process of withdrawing His blessings from us.
Biden, Democrats Moving to Ban Traditional Marriage Advocates from the Public Square
BY MARK TAPSCOTT 1:02 PM ON NOVEMBER 18, 2022
America is about to learn that what liberals actually mean when they claim to support “separation of church and state” is they want to use the power of government to silence those who disagree with them on same-sex marriage.
For years, liberals have perverted the meaning of Thomas Jefferson’s “absolute wall of separation” for keeping the state out of the church to keeping those in the church who uphold the Bible’s definition of marriage out of the public square.
The occasion for this teachable moment is the “Respect for Marriage Act” now before the Senate. Democrats claim the proposal is required to make same-sex marriage legal nationwide, even though the Supreme Court’s Obergefell decision in 2015 did precisely that.
The House passed a similar bill last summer, so there are some differences between the two chambers’ versions that will have to be ironed out, but that will happen quickly and President Joe Biden will sign the measure into the law.
A dozen Republican senators voted with all of the Democrats to advance the proposal. Had this dozen GOP lawmakers voted against advancing the bill, it would still be tied up in the Senate, with an excellent chance of not going any further before the 118th Congress convenes. There’s no guarantee, however, that the new Republican-controlled House of Representatives would block the proposal.
There are two elements here that command attention. The first element is seen in a Washington Post news analysis by staff writer Aaron Blake that reveals one of the most important and fundamental divides in American politics.
The same-sex marriage bill, according to Blake, asks lawmakers “to codify state and federal recognition of a right that the Supreme Court has ruled already exists.” In other words, the rights of every individual American citizen are defined by law, as passed by Congress, signed by the president, and enforced by the Court.
That understanding of the source of individual rights would shock and sadden the Founders, who declared in the Declaration of Independence in 1776 that:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed …
See the difference? The American government was originally based on the understanding that the source of individual rights is the Creator and that government’s purpose is no more, but no less, than to protect those rights.
For liberals, government is the source of individual rights, and that means government defines those rights and has the power to redefine them as desired by whoever happens to be in control at any given time.
And since liberals are in control of the government, they intend to do precisely that—define the right of religious expression and practice so as to exclude from the public square all of those whose sincere faith requires them to reject same-sex marriage.
Simply put, the liberals are saying to millions of Americans that they have no right to disagree in the public square with same-sex marriage and the state can and indeed soon will take their property via taxes and use them to support the enforcement of same-sex marriage as a political right.
That enforcement is the second element here that commands attention. The bill includes provisions that authorize the IRS to jerk the tax exemption of any church or non-profit that opposes same-sex marriage. The bill also encourages litigation to be brought against those same institutions in the court system to enforce the right to same-sex marriage.
Here’s what that means: Soon after Biden signs the bill into law, there will begin to be same-sex couples demanding to be married in evangelical churches they know to be opposed to the practice.
If the pastor refuses to perform the ceremony, the church will be sued and it will lose in court. That litigation will then be used by the IRS as justification for ending the church’s tax-exempt status, as well as the tax-deductibility of congregants’ tithes and contributions.
But that’s not all. The IRS is being primed to be ready for action against evangelical and traditional Catholic social service institutions as well. As Heritage Action for America explains:
Just months after Democrats used the Inflation Reduction Act to fund 87,000 new IRS agents, the Respect for Marriage Act would be giving those new agents carte blanche to harass and target religious schools and other faith-based entities that oppose same-sex marriage and eventually strip them of their tax-exempt status.
Worse, it would create a roving license to sue anyone acting “under color of law” – a loosely defined term that would include those providing government-funded or -regulated services. As a result, adoption centers and foster care providers with religious objections to same-sex marriage would have to close down.
Talk about a slippery slope! Once government becomes the source and dispenser of individual rights, there is no such thing as a “safe space.” What follows, sooner or later, is official persecution of those who demand their right to practice their faith and then speak publicly and vote accordingly.
And don’t be fooled by claims the bill has been amended to include “protections of religious liberty.” As Roger Severino of the Heritage Foundation puts it, such amendments are little more than “fig leaf, smoke and mirrors, lip service, bait and switch.”
Fred, I am not sure if the Senate actually voted to enact the measure. I think there was supposed to be a formal vote on the bill, but perhaps it got postponed? I know they did the initial procedural cloture vote.
Keep on working, great job!
Simply desire to say your article is as astounding.
The clarity in your post is simply excellent and i could assume you are an expert on this subject.
Well with your permission allow me to grab your feed to keep updated with forthcoming post.
Thanks a million and please keep up the rewarding work.
Hey there, You’ve done an incredible job. I’ll certainly digg it
and personally suggest to my friends. I’m confident they will be benefited from this site.
I like the helpful info you supply in your articles.
I’ll bookmark your weblog and take a look at again right here regularly.
I am relatively sure I’ll be informed lots of new stuff proper
right here! Good luck for the following!
Try Before you Buy 2021
After going over a number of the blog posts on your blog, I truly like your way of writing a blog.
I bookmarked it to my bookmark site list and will be checking back soon. Please visit my website as well and
let me know what you think.
Greetings! Very useful advice within this article!
It’s the little changes that will make the
greatest changes. Thanks for sharing!
It’s a pity you don’t have a donate button! I’d without
a doubt donate to this fantastic blog! I suppose for now i’ll
settle for bookmarking and adding your RSS feed to my Google account.
I look forward to brand new updates and will share
this blog with my Facebook group. Talk soon!
I know this if off topic but I’m looking into starting my own weblog and was
wondering what all is needed to get set up?
I’m assuming having a blog like yours would cost a pretty penny?
I’m not very internet smart so I’m not 100% sure. Any suggestions or advice would be greatly appreciated.
Hi! Do you use Twitter? I’d like to follow you if that would
be ok. I’m undoubtedly enjoying your blog and look forward to new updates.
Sorry, not on Twitter. Am on Gab but have not used it recently.
Comments are closed.