|
|
Ted Cruz on Civil Rights |
CRUZ: Well, we've got to turn the economy around for people who are struggling. The Democrats' answer to everything is more government control over wages and more empowering trial lawyers to file lawsuits. Under Barack Obama, 3.7 million women have entered poverty, and the median wage for women has dropped $733. The truth of the matter is, big government benefits the wealthy, it benefits the lobbyists, it benefits the giant corporations, and the people who are getting hammered are small businesses, it's single moms, it's Hispanics. That is who I'm fighting for, the people that Washington leaves behind.
I would urge everyone to read Justice Scalia's dissents. He said that these decisions are an assault on democracy. That this is 5 unelected lawyers declaring they are the rulers of 320 million Americans.
We argued that, rather than discriminating based on race, Princeton should instead adopt economic affirmative action, targeting low-income prospective students. That policy would accomplish similar ends, but would be far more fair. It was striking to have that position advocated by a Hispanic man, and apparently we were persuasive: when the roughly 100 students who attended the debate voted at the end, our side prevailed by a substantial margin.
This was said with total sincerity, and it is sadly a view shared by many well-meaning liberals. But it also proved in a single sentence what was wrong with affirmative action.
"You know what," I began, "that last comment perfectly embodies how insidious affirmative action is." The comment implied that not a single person who was not an Anglo white male deserved to be there. That we couldn't make it on merit that we couldn't rise to the top without the help of our betters.
I observed that the law review did not have affirmative action for women; the affirmative action policy was purely on race. And yet this supercilious liberal had suggested that no women would make the law review if selections were based purely on merit. What nonsense.
The more conservative members of this Republican field--among them Sen. Cruz; Sen. Santorum; Gov. Bobby Jindal; and Gov. Mike Huckabee--have aggressively emphasized their opposition to same-sex marriage. For them, the issue can be used to differentiate themselves not just from Democrats but from mainstream Republicans, like Jeb Bush, who is trying to appeal to a broader audience with an eye to the general election.
Cruz said advocates of traditional marriage should "fall to our knees and pray" against a court decision legalizing same-sex marriage.
Cruz vigorously defended his appearance at the fundraiser, stressing that it was primarily a pro-Israel fundraiser. "Unfortunately, our good friends in the press caricature support for traditional marriage in terms of animus," he said. "The only explanation that makes sense to reporters is that anyone who supports traditional marriage must be somehow motivated by hatred for those who are homosexuals. It's why this story seems so puzzling to the media."
Cruz said he is concerned that women like the owner of an Indiana pizzeria will suffer because they oppose gay marriage. "Scripture commands us to love everyone, & that ought to be a standard that applies across the board," he said. Cruz said liberals are obsessed with "mandatory gay marriage in all 50 states."
The Texas lawmaker said this stance was against America's traditional values. Religious liberty, Cruz claimed, was one of the nation's founding principles. "We were founded by men and women fleeing religious persecution," Cruz declared.
Cruz, a long-time opponent of same-sex marriage, seemingly softened his tone on gay rights earlier this week. The White House hopeful reportedly said Monday evening he would still accept one of his daughters if they became a lesbian.
Many conservative GOP candidates slammed the Supreme Court's rulings--Cruz vowed to introduce a constitutional amendment that would prevent federal courts or government from voiding state laws on marriage--but others considered the more strategic implications.
Mike Huckabee charged that the GOP "establishment" has waved the "white flag of surrender" on gay marriage.
Leppert says government shouldn't be involved in deciding whether gay partners have legal benefits given spouses which might include property inheritance or making medical decisions. Cruz says states should decide those benefits.
Gay rights has become an important test in this primary contest as hardcore Texas Republicans demand candidates take more socially conservatwive stands.
When a state court granted a divorce to two homosexual men who had gotten a civil union in Vermont, Cruz intervened in defense of the Texas marriage laws, which successfully led to the court judgment being vacated;
Cruz authored a US Supreme Court amicus brief on behalf of 10 states in Rahn v. Robb, urging the Supreme Court to grant certiorari and reverse a decision of the Eight Circuit allowing the Ku Klux Klan to participate in Kansas's "Adopt-A-Highway" program.
Opponent's Argument for voting No (The Week; Huffington Post, and The Atlantic): House Republicans had objected to provisions in the Senate bill that extended VAWA's protections to lesbians, gays, immigrants, and Native Americans. For example, Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) voted against the VAWA bill because it was a "politically–motivated, constitutionally-dubious Senate version bent on dividing women into categories by race, transgender politics and sexual preference." The objections can be grouped in two broadly ideological areas--that the law is an unnecessary overreach by the federal government, and that it represents a "feminist" attack on family values. The act's grants have encouraged states to implement "mandatory-arrest" policies, under which police responding to domestic-violence calls are required to make an arrest. These policies were intended to combat the too-common situation in which a victim is intimidated into recanting an abuse accusation. Critics also say VAWA has been subject to waste, fraud, and abuse because of insufficient oversight.
Christian Coalition publishes a number of special voter educational materials including the Christian Coalition Voter Guides, which provide voters with critical information about where candidates stand on important faith and family issues. The Christian Coalition Voters Guide summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: "Maintaining current federal law defining marriage as one man and one woman"
Congressional summary::Prohibits any interpretation of US administrative agencies, as applied with respect to individuals domiciled in a state of the United States:
Opponent's argument against (CNN.com Feb. 8 report on Attorney General Eric Holder's action which prompted this bill): In a major milestone for gay rights, the US government expanded recognition of same-sex marriages in federal legal matters, including bankruptcies, prison visits and survivor benefits. "It is the Justice Department's policy to recognize lawful same-sex marriages as broadly as possible, to ensure equal treatment for all members of society regardless of sexual orientation," Attorney General Eric Holder said. The federal expansion includes 34 states where same-sex marriage isn't legal. For example, a same-sex couple legally married in Massachusetts can now have a federal bankruptcy proceeding recognized in Alabama, even though it doesn't allow same-sex marriages.
Proponent's argument in favor (Washington Post Feb. 13 reporting on Sen. Ted Cruz): If passed, the bill would cede marriage definition to states for federal purposes, which would effectively reverse the gains same-sex couples made after the Defense of Marriage Act was overturned by the Supreme Court in June 2013. Cruz said, "I support traditional marriage. The federal government has tried to re-define marriage, and to undermine the constitutional authority of each state to define marriage consistent with the values of its citizens. The Obama Administration should not be trying to force gay marriage on all 50 states."