Carly Fiorina Bashes Supreme Court On Marriage Ruling
“REPUBLICAN” CANDIDATE BLASTS “ACTIVIST COURT” FOR REDEFINING MARRIAGE || ByYou must Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.
“REPUBLICAN” CANDIDATE BLASTS “ACTIVIST COURT” FOR REDEFINING MARRIAGE || ByYou must Subscribe or log in to read the rest of this content.
20 comments
If she will critize SCOTUS for “Citizens United”, then I will agree with her.
Why would Carly criticize what has been taught in every accounting I or econ I class in universities for decades?
While I generally agree that domestic arrangements are not the business of the government, the question gets more murky when the law itself confers benefits on “marriage.” If the tax code, lenders, pensions, intentional communities etc did not give unequal benefits to “marriage” the question becomes moot. If all are equal under the law, then all should be equal.
giving you a plus 100+ for bringing up that thought train….
Just Use Just Use I looked at the draft which said $9958@mk1
>vvvv
http://www.GlobalworkworldBest/ranking/homes/
I have nipples Berta, can you milk me?
Her face lift has tightened her brain in a vice grip.
now cut that out..!!
Great way to shoot herself in the foot…like she had a chance in hell.
HAS FITS CALLED HER AND ASKED HER OPINION ON THE FLAG???????
Does she watch Southern Charm?
Has she been on Trump Force One?
Has she unfriended anyone on Facebook for having different political opinions?
Can she see why kids love Cinnamon Toast Crunch?
She’s just another boring, banal hater. She should move to South Carolina so she can fit in in with people like Lee Bright.
I was attacked years ago for promoting the idea of a ‘ruling class’.
But, political neophytes like Fiorina, Carson, Trump – who have never, ever been involved enough in their communities OR their childrens’ lives to want to even run for school board – want to be president of the USA.
OMG.
We need some meaningful qualifications for candidates for Congress and the presidency and for state legislatures.
They need to put in at least 8 years in city or county government before being allowed to run for the legislature. Then, 8 years there before they are allowed to run for governor. And, 8 years there (gubernatorial incompetence doesn’t seem to grab some people’s attention until after election to the second term) before they can run for the US House. I wouldn’t make ’em serve more than 6 years before they could run for US Senate.
These are serious jobs that should be filled by real public servants. Today we seem to have too many people running for office because it’s an easy way to fame and fortune for the untalented. If we made it a little harder, more of them might drop out and sell used cars.
Both your position and Carly’s position are just stupid. Marriage has always been a “contractual relationship” I.E. a legal relationship, governed by law. Religion was involved because for most of history the Religion and the State were one and the same.
In ancient Rome. (where most of our modern marriage laws originated) you did not need a priest to get married.
Would you please explain why you always put the word “Republican” in quotation marks. Is there some obscure point that we’re supposed to get? Do you think that nobody is truly a Republican?
“Wait … so she thinks state governments can define marriage? But not the federal government?”
Way to totally miss the concept.
Not surprising. Not surprising at all.
Carly is the one of the onlyRepublican candidates who supports equal rights for same-sex couples. While Obama and Clinton were campaigning against gay marriage, she was providing equal benefits to all gay employees at HP. Yet you go ahead and create an attack piece on her because she also believes in States’ Rights, judicial restraint, and religions freedom. Why don’t you appreciate the fact that Carly has repeatedly spoke out against her party on this issue and hasn’t backed down on her support for equal rights.
Carly is trying to play both sides. She still feels that Indiana’s “religious freedom” law allowing discrimination against gays is fine.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/04/01/capital-download-carly-fiorina/70787634/
The court ruling says not one word about defining marriage. It is all about treating people equally. If Fiorina can’t even read and understand a court ruling she has no place running for public office.
Yes.