Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 192 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

Ted Cruz Seeks To Establish Jim Crow Marriage System

In the 20th century, the South, desperate to preserve its system of racist social hierarchy, set up Jim Crow laws at the state level, creating explicit legal discrimination on the basis of ethnic identity across the region. The rights that many Americans enjoyed in the North and West were taken away from them when they crossed state lines into Dixie.

Southern politicians said it was a matter of liberty. Discrimination to restrict individual legal rights was part of the freedom of states’ rights, they said.

Now, in the 21st century, Senator Ted Cruz is trying to Jim Crow marriage. Yesterday, the Republican politician introduced S. 2024, a bill that would push back against the federal government’s recognition of the legal status of same-sex married couples. Under S. 2024, couples who are married in one place would walk across state lines, and find themselves suddenly single again – even in the eyes of the federal government.

Under the new states’ rights philosophy that motivates S. 2024, the United States of America would devolve, once again, into a hodge podge of different territories, without a consistent system of legal rights shared between them. That’s not a good arrangement for anyone – heterosexual or homosexual.

6 comments to Ted Cruz Seeks To Establish Jim Crow Marriage System

  • First- I am not gay, but happily married to a beautiful woman.

    Second- Ted Cruz just made a severe violation of the Bill of Rights and must be arrested for Title 18, U.S.C., Section 241 – Conspiracy Against Rights,

    Amendment #1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    First Amendment states that Congress (IE the Government) shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion. IF a group of people or just one man or woman wanted to create a church strictly to marry same sex couples, the government MUST RECOGNIZE that marriage.

    Keep in mind, this is coming from a pure Constitutional perspective and the law is the law. You’ll never find me in a gay pride parade, but no one should be above the law and no one should be below the law and Cruz just made the attempt (conspiracy because other people are backing the bill and his aides were involved) himself above the law (again) and homosexuals who want to marry each other below the law.

  • Bill

    It’s kinda fun watching Cruz and Paul competing to out-*sshole each other. I get it that the strategy is to appeal to the basest of the party’s base in order to win the nomination, but how the heck do they plan to then pivot to appeal to in the general to voters with IQs no lower than three standard deviations below the mean? It’s like that old cartoon with a mathematician scribbling out a proof, the middle of which read “…and then a miracle happens….”

  • Shane

    What exaggerated juvenile melodrama calling it a “Jim Crow Marriage System.” The 10th Amendment IS supreme to the Supreme Court. To make multi-racial and multi-moral equally valid is politically correct folly – they are NOT.

    If the liberal states want to endorse a gay marriage-led slide to societal moral lawlessness, then they have a 10th Amendment reserved right to do so. The 10th Amendment gives conservative states the EQUAL reserved right NOT to do so. Conservative states are also not preventing gay couples from MOVING to liberal states that allow gay marriage.

    There is no problem being a hodge-podge of states. The founders intended for healthy competition to exist between the states and that competition would force excellence to be sustained. Those states that are best-managed both fiscally and morally will prosper more than those that aren’t – and they will gain the congressional representation to hold themselves in that position.

    If liberal states are truly run by responsible adults and their politically correct house of cards collapses both morally and financially, they will absorb the consequences like grownups and not try to use Congress to extract bailout moneys from the more morally and fiscally responsible conservative states (and vice-versa.)

Leave a Reply