[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Democrat nominee for NJ Governor, says that she will push an LGBTQ agenda in schools and WILL NOT allow parents to opt out.

Holy SH*T, America's blood supply is tainted with mRNA

Thomas Massie's America First : A Documentary by Tom Woods & Dan Smotz

Kenvue Craters On Report RFK Jr To Link Autism To Tylenol Use In Pregnancy

All 76 weapons at China 2025 military parade explained. 47 are brand new.

Chef: Strategy for Salting Steaks

'Dangerous' Chagas disease confirmed in California, raising concerns for Bay Area

MICROPLASTICS ARE LINKED TO HEART DISEASE; HERE'S HOW TO LOWER YOUR RISK

This Scholar PREDICTED the COLLAPSE of America 700 years ago

I Got ChatGPT To Admit Its Antichrist Purpose

"The CIA is inside Venezuela right now" Col Macgregor says regime change is coming

Caroline Kennedy’s son, Jack Schlossberg, mulling a run.

Florida Surgeon General Nukes ALL School Vaxx Mandates, Likens Them to Slavery

Doc on High Protein Diet. Try for more plant based protein.

ICE EMPTIES Amazon Warehouse… Prime Orders HALTED as ‘Migrant Workforce’ REMOVED

Trump to ask SCOTUS to reverse E. Jean Carroll sex-abuse verdict

Wary Of Gasoline Shortage, California Pauses Price-Gouging Penalty On Oil Companies

Jewish activist Barbara Lerner Spectre calls for the destruction of European

The Democrats Are Literally Making Stuff Up!

Turn Dead Dirt Into Living Soil With IMO 4

Michael Knowles: Trump & Israel, Candace Owens, and Why Christianity Is Booming Despite the Attacks

Save Canada's Ostrich Farms! Protests Erupt Over Government Tyranny in Canada

Holy SH*T! Poland just admitted the TRUTH about Zelensky and it's not good

Very Alarming Earthquakes Strike As We Enter The Month Of September

Billionaire Airbnb Co-Founder Reveals Why He Abandoned Democrat Party For Trump

Monsoon floods devastate Punjab’s crops, (1.7 billion people) at risk of food crisis

List Of 18 Things That Are Going To Happen Within The Next 40 Days

Pentagon Taps 600 Military Lawyers To Serve As Temporary Immigration Judges For DOJ

81 Actors Who Have Passed Away So Far in 2025

High school is different now


Ron Paul
See other Ron Paul Articles

Title: Rand Paul’s ‘solution’ to Kim Davis problem: ‘Why not just privatize marriage?’
Source: [None]
URL Source: http://www.rawstory.com/2015/09/ran ... y-not-just-privatize-marriage/
Published: Sep 4, 2015
Author: Arturo Garcia
Post Date: 2015-09-04 08:49:25 by Ada
Keywords: None
Views: 355
Comments: 14

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) expressed concern over antigay Kentucky clerk Kim Davis’ incarceration on Thursday, saying that the legalization of same-sex marriage threatened to make a “martyr” out of her.

“A lot of people have talked about this for years — why not just privatize marriage?” he asked guest host Tucker Carlson. “Have it in the churches, and people will just go to definition they agree with. But people won’t be forced to acknowledge a definition they don’t agree with.”

Paul’s remarks came after Davis was found in contempt of court and put in jail for refusing to issue licenses to same-sex couples despite being rebuked by both a federal court and the Supreme Court. Davis has argued that she would be breaking “God’s law” by doing so, which has earned her support from some of Paul’s fellow Republican presidential candidates.

“Couldn’t someone have found another way?” Carlson asked. “Hire another clerk, maybe fire this clerk. But jail? That does seem really over the top, no?”

ADVERTISEMENT

Neither Carlson nor Paul mentioned the fact that, because Davis was elected to her position, state lawmakers would have to impeach her. Gov. Steve Bashear (D) will not convene a special session of the General Assembly to propose legislation allowing state officials to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

Instead, Paul — who waffled on the Civil Rights Act in 2010, citing concerns over effects on private businesses — seemed to offer praise for clerks in Alabama who refused to issue any marriage licenses at all because of the high court’s ruling on marriage equality.

The senator did not mention, however, that the resistance by Alabama officials could cost taxpayers there $200,000 in legal fees for the futile effort.

“The thing is that, if you want to persuade people of a new definition of marriage, I think handcuffing people and putting them in jail and making a martyr of someone is probably not a good way to persuade people,” Paul said.

Watch the interview, as aired on Thursday, below.

Click for Full Text!

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Ada (#0)

just abolish marriage licenses, like OK -

www.washingtontimes.com/n...rriage-licenses/?page=all

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-09-04   9:23:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Ada (#0)

Homosexuals want state marriages so one spouse can stay home and receive the state benefits of the other working spouse (medical insurance, soc sec benefits, etc) - paid for my the rest of us taxpayers. That's the whole purpose of forcing gay marriage on society, Mr. Paul. It's the money, stupid.

If the State gets out of the marriage business, which won't happen, it removes the monetary benefits of doing it.

ratcat  posted on  2015-09-05   0:13:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Ada (#0)

Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) expressed concern over antigay Kentucky clerk Kim Davis’ incarceration on Thursday, saying that the legalization of same-sex marriage threatened to make a “martyr” out of her.

And the reason he's not making her his top priority till she's free and rehired is -- ?

Oh, that's right -- the separation of powers excuse.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-09-05   1:26:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Ada (#0)

For 1,000's of years people moved in with each other, raised a family and supported each other and the kids. Then religion got involved and TOLD people that WE, the church, WILL bless all people who wish to live together or you got to hell. BTW: Hell is not mentioned in the bible. The government gor involved, to make money and to control the people.

Darkwing  posted on  2015-09-05   10:04:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Ada (#0)

thefederalist.com/2015/07...ort-privatizing-marriage/

strepsiptera  posted on  2015-09-05   10:50:29 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Darkwing, ratcat, Ada, Lod, NeoconsNailed (#4)

Five Questions About Whether Ending State-Recognized Marriage would Expand Freedom 1. How does lack of state recognition of marriage—replaced by a system of domestic partner contracts—actually shrink government involvement? As Dalmia notes, these partnerships still need to be authorized, recorded, and registered by the state, all according to government regulations. Trading in the simple marriage license for a system of contracts seems akin to trading in a simple flat tax for today’s Internal Revenue Service tax code. The government is and will be deeply involved in the law, rules, regulation, and enforcement of contract law. So, please explain and demonstrate how the government’s role in our lives would be minimized by ending state-recognized marriage.

2. How would you deal with possible legislation to license all parents, including biological parents, once the state no longer recognizes any union, including that of biological parents, as marriage? As stated above, the loss of state recognition of their union as anything more than an ordinary contract will deprive biological parents of the presumption of custody. This scenario seems to open us up to more state meddling in family life, as well as meddling by other parties—particularly when it comes to the child custody.

3. How does privatizing marriage preserve spousal immunity? At present, the government cannot force you to testify against your spouse. That is currently the law in all 50 states. But once the state no longer recognizes you and your spouse as a family unit—only as partners in an ordinary business-style contract—the case for spousal immunity significantly weakens. After all, what’s the rationale for immunity if a “marriage” is no more special than an ordinary contract, and “spouses” are merely associates, individual parties to ordinary contracts? It seems clear this would invite more state intrusion in family relationships, not less. It would invite less privacy, not more. If you disagree, please lay out your plan for preserving spousal immunity in a system without state-recognized marriage.

4. What do you make of the fact that Sunstein, the Obama administration’s regulator-in-chief from 2009 to 2012, argues for essentially the same plan? Sunstein is a long-time advocate of policies that grow government. He’s a big fan of nanny-state style “nudging” intended to modify everyone’s behavior. Clearly, your intent for limited government deviates about 180 degrees from his intent for big government. (Ditto with Fineman’s project to end state-recognized marriage.) So it’s worth connecting a few dots and figuring out what actual path the abolition of civil marriage puts us on. Sunstein has thought this issue through for a very long time and he no doubt sees a road to bigger government. Explain how he is incorrect.

5. How would abolishing state-recognized marriage promote freedom of association for all? The family serves as a buffer zone, or mediating institution, between the individual and the state. But logically, if the government does not have to recognize your marriage, it does not have to respect it. It does not have to recognize your family relationships at all, or your family as a unit. You are merely a separate party in an ordinary contract with someone else, as far as the state is concerned. While the contract with your associate might mutually recognize one another as a “spouse,” and claim that your biological children are “yours,” the state isn’t bound to do the same. And this legal separation in the eyes of the state is destined to reverberate through every other personal association in society. Please explain how abolishing state-recognized marriage protects the family and helps insulate individuals from an increasingly Leviathan state.

strepsiptera  posted on  2015-09-05   10:57:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: strepsiptera (#6)

Government didn't used to be in the marriage business. That's the common law default position. It wasn't a license that proved you were married but registering it in the family Bible. I'll be the first to admit Christianity's faults, but those who hate it would throw away the very core of our civilization.

There's already been talk of licensing parenthood -- before the "gay marriage" ruckus. Everything a government can do to destroy a society, it's on Washington's agenda at all times -- especially if it means more tyranny and control.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-09-05   11:08:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Ada (#0)

Paul is correct on this one. The state can do anything and as an employee of the state that is duty bound by oath to the state, actions must be carried out according to lawful requirements. It need not directly affect religious convictions.

Pridie Nones  posted on  2015-09-05   11:22:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: NeoconsNailed (#7)

Government didn't used to be in the marriage business.

Government has always been in the marriage business; we are discussing the US, of course and governments on all levels have required marriage licenses for record keeping purposes even before the US Constitution was ratified.

Pridie Nones  posted on  2015-09-05   11:25:47 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Pridie Nones (#9)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common- law_marriage#Essential_distinctions_from_statutory_marriage

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-09-05   22:45:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: NeoconsNailed, 4 (#7)

good information on licensing -

www.mercyseat.net/marriagelicense.html

Had I known 37 years back, what I now know; I'd never have done it.

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-09-05   22:55:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Lod (#11)

I was once involved in a wedding in a big, soulless Methodone church and afterward asked the preacher why he was just sitting there in the chancel. "Just waiting for them to come up and sign the license," he said. "Without that what I've just done is of no effect!"

There is definitely something wrong with this picture.

NeoconsNailed  posted on  2015-09-05   23:10:39 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: NeoconsNailed (#12)

There is definitely something wrong with this picture.

Absolutely, positively, there's lots wrong with the picture!

It's just more .gov intervention, money-making, and control of the people: totally unnecessary and totally bogus.

“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken

Lod  posted on  2015-09-05   23:18:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: ratcat (#2)

Homosexuals want state marriages so one spouse can stay home and receive the state benefits of the other working spouse (medical insurance, soc sec benefits, etc) - paid for my the rest of us taxpayers. That's the whole purpose of forcing gay marriage on society, Mr. Paul. It's the money, stupid.

If the State gets out of the marriage business, which won't happen, it removes the monetary benefits of doing it.

exactly!!

christine  posted on  2015-09-06   0:31:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]