|
Tim Scott on Civil Rights
|
|
|
Hear me clearly: America is not a racist country
A hundred years ago, kids in classrooms were taught the color of their skin was their most important characteristic--and if they looked a certain way, they were inferior. Today, kids again are being taught that the color of their skin defines them--
and if they look a certain way, they're an oppressor. Hear me clearly: America is not a racist country. It's wrong to try to use our painful past to dishonestly shut down debates in the present.
Source: Republican response to the 2021 State of the Union address
, Apr 28, 2021
Require state employees to undergo implicit bias training
Gretchen Whitmer signed an executive directive ordering state employees to undergo "implicit bias training." According to the directive, current state employees will be required to undergo "implicit bias training" by the end of this year, while new
employees must complete the training as part of the hiring process. Whitmer's directive also called "to combat racism as a public health crisis."
Source: National Review on 2022 South Carolina Gubernatorial race
, Sep 30, 2020
Our family went from cotton to Congress in one lifetime
My grandfather's 99th birthday would have been tomorrow. Growing up, he had to cross the street if a white person was coming. He suffered the indignity of being forced out of school as a third grader to pick cotton, and never learned to read or write.
Yet, he lived to see his grandson become the first African American to be elected to both the United States House and Senate. Our family went from Cotton to Congress in one lifetime.
Source: Speech at 2020 Republican National Convention
, Aug 25, 2020
Government shouldn't redefine marriage
Question topic: Marriage is a union of one man and one woman. No government has the authority to alter this definition.
Scott: Agree
Source: Faith2Action iVoterGuide on 2014 South Carolina Senate race
, Sep 30, 2014
Sanctity of traditional marriage: one man one woman
Tim Scott lives his South Carolina values--hard work, religious faith, and giving back to the community--and has inspired others to do the same.
Tim Scott believes in the sanctity of traditional marriage between a man and a woman and opposes gay marriage.
Source: 2010 House campaign website, votetimscott.com, "The Issues"
, Nov 2, 2010
Opposes same-sex marriage.
Scott supports the PVS survey question on same-sex marriage
Project Vote Smart infers candidate issue stances on key topics by summarizing public speeches and public statements. Candidates are given the opportunity to respond in detail; about 16% did so in the 2010 races.
Project Vote Smart summarizes candidate stances on the following topic: 'Social Issues: Should marriage only be between one man and one woman?'
Source: Project Vote Smart 10-PVS-q3 on Nov 2, 2010
State definition of marriage supersedes federal gay marriage.
Scott co-sponsored State Marriage Defense Act
Congressional summary::Prohibits any interpretation of US administrative agencies, as applied with respect to individuals domiciled in a state of the United States:
- the term `marriage` from including any relationship that the state does not recognize as a marriage; and
- the term `spouse` from including an individual who is a party to a relationship that is not recognized as a marriage by that state.
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.`
Source: H.R.3829 & S. 2024 14-S2024 on Feb 12, 2014
Respect faith-based opposition to same-sex marriage.
Scott co-sponsored respecting faith-based opposition to same-sex marriage
Congressional Summary: The First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) prohibits the federal government from taking discriminatory action against a person on the basis that such person believes or acts in accordance with a religious belief or moral conviction that:
- marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or
- sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.
Legal Argument Opposed: [Secular.org]: `The stated purpose of FADA is to protect the tax-exempt status, government contract, or any other federal benefit of those who do not comply with the Supreme Court`s same-sex marriage ruling. This act`s true impact would allow for sweeping, taxpayer-funded discrimination against same-sex couples and their children--all under the guise of religious liberty. FADA would completely eviscerate the historic nondiscrimination Executive Order that President Obama signed last summer that prohibits federal contractors from
engaging in discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. The First Amendment protects freedom of religion and freedom from religion, not the special privileges of the religiously affiliated at the expense of the fundamental rights of other Americans.`Political Argument Opposed: [ACLU, July 20, 2015]: The House of Representatives & leading anti-LGBT organizations are pushing a bill--disingenuously titled the First Amendment Defense Act--that would open the door to unprecedented taxpayer-funded discrimination against LGBT people, single mothers, and unmarried couples. This bill would
- allow federal contractors, including those that provide homeless shelters or drug treatment programs, to turn away LGBT people
- permit a university to fire an unmarried teacher simply for becoming pregnant
- permit federal employees to refuse to process tax returns, visa applications, or Social Security checks for all married same-sex couples
Source: H.R.2802 16-HR2802 on Jun 17, 2015
Page last updated: Jan 24, 2024; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org