Ted Cruz 101
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-04-2016, 06:26 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 03:06 PM)Old Man Marsh Wrote:  
(09-04-2016 01:54 PM)Alla Wrote:  So, these are Ted Cruz's own words.
Hmm, not a word that Congress has to establish religion.
Not a word that Congress has to establish religion.
Still, not a word.
Not a word that Congress has to establish religion.

Ted Cruz didn't say that the First amendment establishes that "Of course! Every one of us has God-given right to seek out and worship God."
He said that THE RIGHT to EXERSISE religion is not coming from men(the government). That is why Congress shall not make law respecting religion.
We believe and Founding Fathers believed that this right comes from God.
Now, these are NOT Cruz's OWN words. I heard the opposite in his OWN WORDS.
These are also NOT his own words but words of some left wing activist.
Please, please, his OWN words that he believes that if something is against his own religious belief, he wants to make it against the law.
Where did he say (and when that) that he will have power to enact a national ban on same-sex marriage?
Hmm. Good questions. Did he ever say that he will force anything on people?
I heard in his OWN WORDS that he believes in the Constitution, he defends the Constitution and that PEOPLE are the ones who decide what they want when they vote. Not 5 unelected people, not one person -president, but PEOPLE.

The first amendment does not say that Congress shall not establish a religion. says says that Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion.

Christianity is an establishment of religion.

Islam is an establishment of religion.

Scientology is an establishment of religion.

Motel 6 is an establishment of business.

Do you undertstand the first amendment now? Do I have to diagram the sentence again?
I thank you for helping me with my English(foreign language).
Anyways, Ted Cruz didn't say anything(not a word) in that statement that the Congress shall make law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 06:35 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
Q: How does Senator Ted Cruz plan to handle the gay marriage issue if he’s elected President?

A: in HIS OWN WORDS:

“Last week, twice in two days, the Supreme Court disregarded the Constitution. You know, reasonable minds can disagree on the question of marriage. Personally, I am a strong supporter of traditional marriage, of the union of one man and one woman. And marriage was not created by man. It was ordained by God. But I’ve also spent decades fighting to defend the Constitution. And UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, marriage has always been a question for the states,”

Q: How does Sen. Cruz plan address the issue of gay marriage and the activist court?
A: in HIS OWN WORDS:
“Several months ago, I introduced in the United States Senate a constitutional amendment to protect the authority of state legislatures to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Cruz said. “Number two, I introduced legislation in the United States Senate stripping the federal courts of jurisdiction over a tax on marriage. That’s one of the explicit checks and balances the Constitution gives Congress to reign in an overreaching judiciary.” “And then number three, in the wake of last week’s rulings, I have publicly called for us to adopt a constitutional amendment to make Supreme Court justices subject to periodic judicial retention elections. Twenty states across the union do that. And if these Supreme Court justices are going to jump into the political sphere, are going to violate federal law and violate the Constitution, then we’ve got to have a meaningful check for we, the people, to reign in judicial tyranny.”
Q: does Cruz understand the Constitution?
A: my answer that he does:

EVIDENCE/FACTS:
Cruz also took time to address his stance as a fighter for religious freedom. “Where I very much agree with you is that religious liberty is in the crosshairs. One of the things I write about at great length in my new book, A Time for Truth, is the two decades I’ve spent fighting to defend religious liberty over and over again. Solicitor General of Texas defending the ten commandment monuments on the state capitol grounds, winning 5-4 before the Supreme Court. Defending the Pledge of Allegiance, the words “one nation under God,” winning unanimously before the Supreme Court. And in private practice, representing pro bono, for free, over 3 million veterans defending the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial, a lone white Latin cross erected over 70 years ago to honor the men and women who lost their lives in World War I, and winning 5-4 before the US Supreme Court.”

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 06:41 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
Ted Cruz is Constitutional Conservative BEFORE he is some kind of activist. He knows Constitution, he memorized and he understands it. He defends the Constitution unlike many politians. Many politians and even some Justices are activists before they defend the Constitution and this is scary not Cruz who is passionate defender of the Constitution and founding principles.

English is my second language.
I AM DEPLORABLE AND IRREDEEMABLE
SHE PERSISTED WE RESISTED
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 06:56 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
What is the justification for saying Marriage should be defined as the union of one man and one woman?

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 08:27 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 06:56 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  What is the justification for saying Marriage should be defined as the union of one man and one woman?

Christians cite a couple of bible passages. Matthew 19:4-6 and one other that I can't remember from Genesis.

However, the Mormons, Alla's people, believe it can be "among" one man and several women. Today, most Mormons have gone to the one man and one woman deal but, unfortunately, many of them believe it is o.k. if the woman is only 14 years old and maybe even younger. I had a classmate in law school who was a Mormon with a 14 year old wife. He was 24 or 25. I don't know how old she was when they got married but they had a one year old baby and that baby would have been born when she was 13.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 09:02 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 08:27 PM)Black Eagle Wrote:  
(09-04-2016 06:56 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  What is the justification for saying Marriage should be defined as the union of one man and one woman?

Christians cite a couple of bible passages. Matthew 19:4-6 and one other that I can't remember from Genesis.

However, the Mormons, Alla's people, believe it can be "among" one man and several women. Today, most Mormons have gone to the one man and one woman deal but, unfortunately, many of them believe it is o.k. if the woman is only 14 years old and maybe even younger. I had a classmate in law school who was a Mormon with a 14 year old wife. He was 24 or 25. I don't know how old she was when they got married but they had a one year old baby and that baby would have been born when she was 13.

Gasp

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 09:14 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 06:35 PM)Alla Wrote:  Q: How does Senator Ted Cruz plan to handle the gay marriage issue if he’s elected President?

A: in HIS OWN WORDS:

“Last week, twice in two days, the Supreme Court disregarded the Constitution. You know, reasonable minds can disagree on the question of marriage. Personally, I am a strong supporter of traditional marriage, of the union of one man and one woman. And marriage was not created by man. It was ordained by God. But I’ve also spent decades fighting to defend the Constitution. And UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, marriage has always been a question for the states,”

Q: How does Sen. Cruz plan address the issue of gay marriage and the activist court?
A: in HIS OWN WORDS:
“Several months ago, I introduced in the United States Senate a constitutional amendment to protect the authority of state legislatures to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Cruz said. “Number two, I introduced legislation in the United States Senate stripping the federal courts of jurisdiction over a tax on marriage. That’s one of the explicit checks and balances the Constitution gives Congress to reign in an overreaching judiciary.” “And then number three, in the wake of last week’s rulings, I have publicly called for us to adopt a constitutional amendment to make Supreme Court justices subject to periodic judicial retention elections. Twenty states across the union do that. And if these Supreme Court justices are going to jump into the political sphere, are going to violate federal law and violate the Constitution, then we’ve got to have a meaningful check for we, the people, to reign in judicial tyranny.”
Q: does Cruz understand the Constitution?
A: my answer that he does:

EVIDENCE/FACTS:
Cruz also took time to address his stance as a fighter for religious freedom. “Where I very much agree with you is that religious liberty is in the crosshairs. One of the things I write about at great length in my new book, A Time for Truth, is the two decades I’ve spent fighting to defend religious liberty over and over again. Solicitor General of Texas defending the ten commandment monuments on the state capitol grounds, winning 5-4 before the Supreme Court. Defending the Pledge of Allegiance, the words “one nation under God,” winning unanimously before the Supreme Court. And in private practice, representing pro bono, for free, over 3 million veterans defending the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial, a lone white Latin cross erected over 70 years ago to honor the men and women who lost their lives in World War I, and winning 5-4 before the US Supreme Court.”


You know, it's plagiarism if you just copy-paste someone else's work with citation or attribution, right? Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-04-2016, 09:49 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 06:35 PM)Alla Wrote:  “Last week, twice in two days, the Supreme Court disregarded the Constitution. You know, reasonable minds can disagree on the question of marriage. Personally, I am a strong supporter of traditional marriage, of the union of one man and one woman. And marriage was not created by man. It was ordained by God. But I’ve also spent decades fighting to defend the Constitution. And UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, marriage has always been a question for the states,”


Cruz doesn't seem to know enough about his own Bible or history to have a grasp on 'traditional' marriage. He's ignoring one man with a wife and concubines, a man a woman and her female slaves, polygamy, a man and his brother's widow, a rapist and his victim, a male solider and a female prisoner of war, and male slave and his designated female slave wife. So only counting one man and one woman as 'traditional' is very selective on his part, and belies just how utterly full of shit that argument is.

[Image: biblical_marriage_chart.jpg]

If a harem was good enough for King Solomon, how come it isn't 'traditional' enough for Cruz? Simple answer? He's a cunt and only cares about pushing his own interpretation of his own religion onto other people. That's why he can go fuck himself.



(09-04-2016 06:35 PM)Alla Wrote:  “Several months ago, I introduced in the United States Senate a constitutional amendment to protect the authority of state legislatures to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Cruz said.


Which he has to do, because the Supreme Court (the arbiters of the Constitution) disagree with him.



(09-04-2016 06:35 PM)Alla Wrote:  “And then number three, in the wake of last week’s rulings, I have publicly called for us to adopt a constitutional amendment to make Supreme Court justices subject to periodic judicial retention elections. Twenty states across the union do that. And if these Supreme Court justices are going to jump into the political sphere, are going to violate federal law and violate the Constitution, then we’ve got to have a meaningful check for we, the people, to reign in judicial tyranny.”
Q: does Cruz understand the Constitution?
A: my answer that he does:


Judges are unelected, not so that they're above reproach, but so that they can be held accountable to the law and not to popular opinion. Judges are unelected so that they can arbitrate according to the law, and not have to worry about whether their ruling will be popular or not. Studies have shown that in areas where judges are elected, the sentences they hand down leading up to election get progressively more severe; they are being harsher to shore up their record for reelection. That's not justice. I don't want a judge giving someone 5 years for possession because he's more concerned with reelection than with the application of justice.

So no, Cruz doesn't understand the Constitution, because he fundamentally doesn't understand the rational behind judges being appointed instead of elected.




(09-04-2016 06:35 PM)Alla Wrote:  Cruz also took time to address his stance as a fighter for religious freedom. “Where I very much agree with you is that religious liberty is in the crosshairs. One of the things I write about at great length in my new book, A Time for Truth, is the two decades I’ve spent fighting to defend religious liberty over and over again. Solicitor General of Texas defending the ten commandment monuments on the state capitol grounds, winning 5-4 before the Supreme Court. Defending the Pledge of Allegiance, the words “one nation under God,” winning unanimously before the Supreme Court. And in private practice, representing pro bono, for free, over 3 million veterans defending the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial, a lone white Latin cross erected over 70 years ago to honor the men and women who lost their lives in World War I, and winning 5-4 before the US Supreme Court.”


Replace his every use of 'religious freedom' or 'religious liberty' with 'religious privilege' or 'religious overreach', and then he might almost be correct.

But of course, when a court allows an explicitly religious monument to stay on public grounds, he's a hero. But when another court ruled that homosexuals are people too and still have equal protection under the law, now the courts need elections to reign in their 'activism'. The guy's a cunt, a political opportunist, and a liar. So I can understand why you'd like his so much. I mean, after all, you lie for your faith, he lies for his faith; I understand why you think you two have so much in common.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
09-04-2016, 11:37 PM
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 09:14 PM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  You know, it's plagiarism if you just copy-paste someone else's work with citation or attribution, right? Drinking Beverage

No, it is if you OMIT the attribution. The crime is in trying to pass it off as your own work.

Alla, Cruz is not a constitutional scholar by any stretch of the imagination. He may have committed the constitution to memory and he did clerk at SCOTUS but that does not make him an expert. I know lots of former SCOTUS clerks that I wouldn't retain to defend my dog. The constitution is the most complex document in American law and one of the problems we have is that the language is not always clear. [Even when it seems clear, it might not be so. For example, see the 14th amendment and the famous Slaughter House cases.] He also calls himself a "constitutional conservative." That phrase really has no meaning but that's not a discussion I want to have.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
19-04-2016, 09:34 PM (This post was last modified: 20-04-2016 06:23 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Ted Cruz 101
(09-04-2016 06:35 PM)Alla Wrote:  Q: How does Senator Ted Cruz plan to handle the gay marriage issue if he’s elected President?

A: in HIS OWN WORDS:

“Last week, twice in two days, the Supreme Court disregarded the Constitution. You know, reasonable minds can disagree on the question of marriage. Personally, I am a strong supporter of traditional marriage, of the union of one man and one woman. And marriage was not created by man. It was ordained by God. But I’ve also spent decades fighting to defend the Constitution. And UNDER THE CONSTITUTION, marriage has always been a question for the states,”

Q: How does Sen. Cruz plan address the issue of gay marriage and the activist court?
A: in HIS OWN WORDS:
“Several months ago, I introduced in the United States Senate a constitutional amendment to protect the authority of state legislatures to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman,” Cruz said. “Number two, I introduced legislation in the United States Senate stripping the federal courts of jurisdiction over a tax on marriage. That’s one of the explicit checks and balances the Constitution gives Congress to reign in an overreaching judiciary.” “And then number three, in the wake of last week’s rulings, I have publicly called for us to adopt a constitutional amendment to make Supreme Court justices subject to periodic judicial retention elections. Twenty states across the union do that. And if these Supreme Court justices are going to jump into the political sphere, are going to violate federal law and violate the Constitution, then we’ve got to have a meaningful check for we, the people, to reign in judicial tyranny.”
Q: does Cruz understand the Constitution?
A: my answer that he does:

EVIDENCE/FACTS:
Cruz also took time to address his stance as a fighter for religious freedom. “Where I very much agree with you is that religious liberty is in the crosshairs. One of the things I write about at great length in my new book, A Time for Truth, is the two decades I’ve spent fighting to defend religious liberty over and over again. Solicitor General of Texas defending the ten commandment monuments on the state capitol grounds, winning 5-4 before the Supreme Court. Defending the Pledge of Allegiance, the words “one nation under God,” winning unanimously before the Supreme Court. And in private practice, representing pro bono, for free, over 3 million veterans defending the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial, a lone white Latin cross erected over 70 years ago to honor the men and women who lost their lives in World War I, and winning 5-4 before the US Supreme Court.”

Since you are a profoundly ignorant woman, and incapable of critical thought, let me point out to you, that these examples PROVE that Little Pee Wee Cruz has no clue what "religious freedom" means. The fact that he would IMPOSE HIS religion's symbols onto a PUBLIC PLACE, (therefore implying an "establishment" of one religion over another) PROVES he has no clue what the First Amendment is all about. Would he permit MUSLIM symbols and fight for THEM on Texas State property ? If not, he's a hypocrite. Would YOU defend symbols of Baal on Texas property ? Ted Cruz has not one clue what real "conservative Constitutional values" are. he can see things ONLY in light of his idiotic religion.

Crosses don't belong on veterans monuments who DIED to preserve the liberty to be FREE FROM (on e specific) religion's bullshit. Allowing crosses on PUBLIC property IS establishing religion, you fucking idiot.

Pee Wee Cruz got NOT ONE delegate from New York tonight. There is NO WAY he can win the presidency without New York.

The Declaration of Independence says ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL .. that means ALL Americans have the right to marry whom they choose, NOT your interpretation of you holy book's idea of that. One does not "vote" on inalieneable rights, given to EVERYONE, by the Constitution and declaration of Independence.

Proposing that Supreme Court justices be subject to elections PROVES that Cruz is NOT a "conservative" in any way, shape or form .. and in fact does not even understand the Constitution AT ALL. Memorizing it, does not mean the fool understands it, (just as you, Alla, have no clue what its values are).

Quote:"EVIDENCE/FACTS:
Cruz also took time to address his stance as a fighter for religious freedom. “Where I very much agree with you is that religious liberty is in the crosshairs. One of the things I write about at great length in my new book, A Time for Truth, is the two decades I’ve spent fighting to defend religious liberty over and over again. Solicitor General of Texas defending the ten commandment monuments on the state capitol grounds, winning 5-4 before the Supreme Court. Defending the Pledge of Allegiance, the words “one nation under God,” winning unanimously before the Supreme Court. And in private practice, representing pro bono, for free, over 3 million veterans defending the Mojave Desert Veterans Memorial, a lone white Latin cross erected over 70 years ago to honor the men and women who lost their lives in World War I, and winning 5-4 before the US Supreme Court.”

.... is neither "evidence" nor "facts". Your quote contains no rational reason WHY his stupid actions are JUSTIFIED legally, only what he did and said.
In fact Cruz is HATED by the Republicans in the Senate. Senator McConnell DESPISES Cruz, as he knows he's a wacko and would do nothing but divide the US even further. He cannot win a national election, he is NOT a real "conservative", he does not understand the BASIC *SEPARATION* of church and state that underlies the US Constitution, just as YOU do not, Alla.
Maybe some day, you'll go get yourself an education on the BASICS, before you make a fool of yourself.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: