What "Conservative Values" aren't based on bigotry?

Yes it is indefensible from a liberal’s perception of fairness.

I don’t care either way.

There is state ownership of the means of production in families, churches, and charity?

First provide evidence for the claim. How do you measure how an individual is affected by taxes? My rebuttal would simply be that you cannot claim to know how an individual is affected by a tax. There is not a legitimate means to measure subjective value between two different people.

As an American minority, I will have to say that it is not.

Let me try to get this clarified.

You’re saying that, say, free college tuition for anyone who can’t afford college would be OK because it’s temporary assistance that will in many cases improve the person’s chance of getting a well paid job later on; but funding schools or job assistance for people with significant developmental disabilities would not be acceptable because they’re going to need assistance for all of their lives.

Is that what you mean?

Scylla: You could have saved some keystrokes with “no u”. :rolleyes:

Will, I’ll humor you for a bit by asking if you know what disposable and nondisposable income are, and if you know what expenses nondisposable income covers. I suspect that you do not, since you could not make the statements you have made here if you did.

That is like claiming that anecdote should be data. Since that is not done your reply is really useless and irrelevant.

In the real world that is not looked at, and the data shows that flat tax proposals will harm the less wealthy more.

It’s because I have feelz and empathy that I feel the way I do.

I saw that. I also saw Ayanna Pressley this very weekend telling the cheering crowd that that you are not really black, not really gay, not really a women if you disagree with her.

piffle, the evidence does not care what you think.

BTW, As a Salvadoran American I have to say that the evidence shows that Republicans are condoning more than just words for the bigoted acts of Trump and henchmen:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration/aclu-files-suit-to-block-trump-rule-to-stop-asylum-seekers-idUSKCN1UB2BW

Do you have a link to this?

You do know then where she wanted them to go if not?

Really Scylla, you are better that a very red herring whataboutism talking point.

If it is ok for this open anti-Semite who talks about how America is such a terrible place to call Trump a white Nationalist running concentration camps than I guess it is ok for Trump to say send her back.

This doesn’t parse.

Most people prefer not be disemboweled.

That’s the funny thing about extreme libertarians. They can only exist in a system which protects them even as they argue the system should be eliminated.

So…

Perhaps it is possible that we could discuss asylum laws, and immigration policy in this country on a substantive level at some point.

But if you think asylum laws are being abused and you wish to change them… you are a racist?

That is not what racism means.

It was not ok and AFAIK she regretted that and **even Democrats joined Republicans by officially letting her that was not ok to do. **

Now, I do expect that you will demand that Trump and henchmen will do the same, and the Republicans in congress will join Democrats in their condemnation of what Trump and henchmen are doing…

… I will want a pony too.

So, get better.

Unsurprisingly, your cite is not consistent with your claim of what it says.

Your version:

I wish I could agree that you’re better than this, but the evidence keeps piling up.

Your post to me said:

Emphasis mine.

So, yeah, that’s you accusing me of racism.

Okay, you don’t think there’s a serious problem with bigotry on the right. Which brings us back to the question: why are there so few minority Republicans? What is it about he Republican party, in your view, that leads only about 10% of black people to support it? How does the party that literally ended slavery end up with so few black supporters?

Fantastic. Have a cookie.

Then where are all the black Republicans? Why do Hispanics vote Democrat at such high margins? If the Democrats are so much more racist, how did we end up with the party that’s more diverse than the Republicans by orders of magnitude?

Yes, they did. I was pretty vocal about calling Obama out for his bigotry on the boards, too. Like the vast majority of queer people, I still voted for him, because the Republicans were even worse. Pointing out that the Republican party has become the standard bearer for racism and homophobia is not the same as claiming that Democrats are perfect and always have been. But pretending there’s any degree of parity between the two groups on the subject is a joke.

What part of that statement is untrue? Do you think that there’s a significant body of support for Republicans among queer voters? Do you think that opposition to gay rights was not a significant Republican position over the last 20 years? Do you think the Democrats were more opposed to gay rights?

I’m sorry, what? Have you been living under a rock?

Alabama:

[spoiler]ALABAMA CONSTITUTION - Amendment 774. Sanctity of Marriage Amendment (=Ref.1, cited as the approves of Marriage Amendment)
& ALABAMA CODE - Title 30. Marital and domestic relations - Chapter 1. Marriage.
§ 30-1-19. Marriage, recognition thereof, between persons of the same sex prohibited.(=Ref.2, cited as the “Alabama Marriage Protection Act”)

Ref.1 (b) & Ref.2 (b)
Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting the unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.

Ref.1 (c) & Ref.2 (c)
Marriage is a sacred covenant, solemnized between a man and a woman, which, when the legal capacity and consent of both parties is present, establishes their relationship as husband and wife, and which is recognized by the state as a civil contract.

Ref.1 (d) & Ref.2 (d)
No marriage license shall be issued in the State of Alabama to parties of the same sex.

Ref.1 (e) & Ref.2 (e)
The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any marriage of parties of the same sex that occurred or was alleged to have occurred as a result of the law of any jurisdiction regardless of whether a marriage license was issued.

Ref.1 (f)
The State of Alabama shall not recognize as valid any common law marriage of parties of the same sex.

Ref.1 (g)
A union replicating marriage of or between persons of the same sex in the State of Alabama or in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state as a marriage or other union replicating marriage[/spoiler]
Alaska:

[spoiler]ALASKA CONSTITUTION - Article I. Declaration of Rights - §25. Marriage :
To be valid or recognized in this State, a marriage may exist only between one man and one woman.

ALASKA STATUTES - Section 25. Marital and domestic relations - Chapter 25.05. Alaska marriage code
Section 25.05.013. Same-sex marriage:
(a) A marriage entered into by persons of the same sex, either under common law or under statute, that is recognized by another state or foreign jurisdiction is void in this state, and contractual rights granted by virtue of the marriage, including its termination, are unenforceable in this state.
(b) A same-sex relationship may not be recognized by the state as being entitled to the benefits of marriage.[/spoiler]

Arizona:

[spoiler]
ARIZONA CONSTITUTION - ARTICLE XXX. MARRIAGE:

  1. Marriage
    Section 1. Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES - Title 25 - Marital and Domestic Relations
§ 25-101 Void and prohibited marriages
… C. A marriage between persons of the same sex is void and prohibited.[/spoiler]

Arkansas:

[spoiler]Arkansas Constitution Amendment 83:
Section 1. Marriage. Marriage consists only of the union of one man and one woman.
Section 2. Marital status. Legal status for unmarried persons which is identical or substantially similar to marital status shall not be valid or recognized in Arkansas, except that the legislature may recognize a common law marriage from another state between a man and a woman.

Arkansas Code Annotated - Title 9. Family law - subtitle 2. Domestic relations - chapter 11. Marriage (law passed 1997)
Subchapter 1. General Provisions.
Section 9-11-107. Same sex marriage void
Marriage shall be only between a man and a woman. A marriage between persons of the same sex is void.
Section 9-11-109. Validity of foreign marriages
(a) All marriages contracted outside this state which would be valid by the laws of the state or country in which the marriages were consummated and in which the parties then actually resided shall be valid in all the courts in this state.
(b) This section shall not apply to a marriage between persons of the same sex.

Subchapter 2. License and Ceremony.
Section 9-11-208. License not issued to persons under age or to persons of the same sex.
(b) It shall be the declared public policy of the State of Arkansas to recognize the marital union only of man and woman. No license shall be issued to persons to marry another person of the same sex and no same-sex marriage shall be recognized as entitled to the benefits of marriage.
(c) Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex, where a marriage license is issued by another state or by a foreign jurisdiction, shall be void in Arkansas and any contractual or other rights granted by virtue of that license, including its termination, shall be unenforceable in the Arkansas courts.[/spoiler]

California:

[spoiler]Texts:

California Constitution - Article I. Declaration of rights.
Section 7.5. - Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.

[1] - Division 3. Marriage - Part 1. Validity of Marriage
(a) Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between two persons, to which the consent of the parties capable of making that contract is necessary. Consent alone does not constitute marriage. Consent must be followed by the issuance of a license and solemnization as authorized by this division, except as provided by Section 425 and Part 4 (commencing with Section 500).[/spoiler]

Colorado:

[spoiler]COLORADO CONSTITUTION, Art. II, §31:
Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

COLORADO REVISED STATUTES §14-2-104:
(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (3) of this section, a marriage is valid in this state if:
(a) It is licensed, solemnized, and registered as provided in this part 1; and
(b) It is only between one man and one woman.
(2) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 14-2-112, any marriage contracted within or outside this state that does not satisfy paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section shall not be recognized as valid in this state.[/spoiler]

Florida:

[spoiler]Florida Constitution - Article I. Declaration of rights:
Section 27. Marriage defined. - Inasmuch as marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.

Florida Statutes Annotated - Title XLIII. Domestic relations - Chapter 741. Marriage; Domestic violence.
Section 741.04. Marriage license issued.
No county court judge or clerk of the circuit court in this state shall issue a license for the marriage of any person … unless one party is a male and the other party is a female.
Section 741.212. Marriages between persons of the same sex
(1) Marriages between persons of the same sex entered into in any jurisdiction, whether within or outside the State of Florida, the United States, or any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location, or relationships between persons of the same sex which are treated as marriages in any jurisdiction, whether within or outside the State of Florida, the United States, or any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location, are not recognized for any purpose in this state.
(2) The state, its agencies, and its political subdivisions may not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any state, territory, possession, or tribe of the United States or of any other jurisdiction, either domestic or foreign, or any other place or location respecting either a marriage or relationship not recognized under subsection (1) or a claim arising from such a marriage or relationship.
(3) For purposes of interpreting any state statute or rule, the term “marriage” means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the term “spouse” applies only to a member of such a union.[/spoiler]

Georgia:

[spoiler]Constitution of Georgia. Article I Section IV:
Paragraph I. Recognition of marriage.
(a) This state shall recognize as marriage only the union of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.
(b) No union between persons of the same sex shall be recognized by this state as entitled to the benefits of marriage. This state shall not give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state or jurisdiction respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other state or jurisdiction. The courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to any such relationship or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties’ respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such relationship.

Georgia Code Annotated - Title 19. Domestic Relations - Chapter 3. Marriage generally - Article 1. General Provisions
Section 19-3-3.1 Same sex marriages prohibited
(a) It is declared to be the public policy of this state to recognize the union only of man and woman. Marriages between persons of the same sex are prohibited in this state.
(b) No marriage between persons of the same sex shall be recognized as entitled to the benefits of marriage. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex pursuant to a marriage license issued by another state or foreign jurisdiction or otherwise shall be void in this state. Any contractual rights granted by virtue of such license shall be unenforceable in the courts of this state and the courts of this state shall have no jurisdiction whatsoever under any circumstances to grant a divorce or separate maintenance with respect to such marriage or otherwise to consider or rule on any of the parties’ respective rights arising as a result of or in connection with such marriage.[/spoiler]

Idaho:

[spoiler]IDAHO CONSTITUTION - Article III. Legislative department - §28. Marriage
A marriage between a man and a woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state

IDAHO CODE - Title 32. Domestic relations - Chapter 2. Marriage; nature and validity of marriage contract
§ 32-209. Recognition of foreign or out-of-state marriages
All marriages contracted without this state, which would be valid by the laws of the state or country in which the same were contracted, are valid in this state, unless they violate the public policy of this state. Marriages that violate the public policy of this state include, but are not limited to, same-sex marriages, and marriages entered into under the laws of another state or country with the intent to evade the prohibitions of the marriage laws of this state.[/spoiler]

Kansas:

[spoiler]Kansas Constitution, Article 15, Section 16
(a) The marriage contract is to be considered in law as a civil contract. Marriage shall be constituted by one man and one woman only. All other marriages are declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state and are void.
(b) No relationship, other than a marriage, shall be recognized by the state as entitling the parties to the rights or incidents of marriage.

Kansas Statute, Section 23-2501. Nature of marriage relation.
The marriage contract is to be considered in law as a civil contract between two parties who are of opposite sex. All other marriages are declared to be contrary to the public policy of this state and are void. The consent of the parties is essential. The marriage ceremony may be regarded either as a civil ceremony or as a religious sacrament, but the marriage relation shall only be entered into, maintained or abrogated as provided by law.

Kansas Statute Section 23-2508. Validity of marriages contracted without state.
All marriages contracted without this state, which would be valid by the laws of the country in which the same were contracted, shall be valid in all courts and places in this state. It is the strong public policy of this state only to recognize as valid marriages from other states that are between a man and a woman.[/spoiler]

Kentucky:

[spoiler]Kentucky Constitution, Section 233A
Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in Kentucky. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized.

Kentucky Revised Statutes
Section 402.005 Definition of marriage.
As used and recognized in the law of the Commonwealth, “marriage” refers only to the civil status, condition, or relation of one (1) man and one (1) woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent upon those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex.
Section 402.020 Other prohibited marriages.
(1) Marriage is prohibited and void: (d) Between members of the same sex;
Section 402.040 Marriage in another state
(1) If any resident of this state marries in another state, the marriage shall be valid here if valid in the state where solemnized, unless the marriage is against Kentucky public policy.
(2) A marriage between members of the same sex is against Kentucky public policy and shall be subject to the prohibitions established in KRS 402.045.
Section 402.045 Same-sex marriage in another jurisdiction void and unenforceable.
(1) A marriage between members of the same sex which occurs in another jurisdiction shall be void in Kentucky.
(2) Any rights granted by virtue of the marriage, or its termination, shall be unenforceable in Kentucky courts.[/spoiler]

Lousiana:

[spoiler]Louisiana Constitution, Article XII, section 15. Defense of Marriage
Marriage in the state of Louisiana shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall construe this constitution or any state law to require that marriage or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon any member of a union other than the union of one man and one woman. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized. No official or court of the state of Louisiana shall recognize any marriage contracted in any other jurisdiction which is not the union of one man and one woman.

Louisiana Civil code
Article 89. Impediment of same sex
Persons of the same sex may not contract marriage with each other. A purported marriage between persons of the same sex contracted in another state shall be governed by the provisions of Title II of Book IV of the Civil Code.
Article 96. Civil effects of absolutely null marriage; putative marriage
§4. A purported marriage between parties of the same sex does not produce any civil effects.
Article 3520. Marriage (Title II of Book IV of the Civil Code)
A. A marriage that is valid in the state where contracted, or in the state where the parties were first domiciled as husband and wife, shall be treated as a valid marriage unless to do so would violate a strong public policy of the state whose law is applicable to the particular issue under Article 3519.
B. A purported marriage between persons of the same sex violates a strong public policy of the state of Louisiana and such a marriage contracted in another state shall not be recognized in this state for any purpose, including the assertion of any right or claim as a result of the purported marriage.[/spoiler]

Michigan:

[spoiler]Michigan Constitution, Article I, Section 25
To secure and preserve the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose.

Michigan Compiled Laws Annotated
551.1 Marriage between individuals of same sex as invalid contract.[2]
Marriage is inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman. As a matter of public policy, this state has a special interest in encouraging, supporting, and protecting that unique relationship in order to promote, among other goals, the stability and welfare of society and its children. A marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex is invalid in this state.
551.271 Marriages solemnized in another state validated.[3]
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this act, a marriage contracted between a man and a woman who are residents of this state and who were, at the time of the marriage, legally competent to contract marriage according to the laws of this state, which marriage is solemnized in another state within the United States by a clergyman, magistrate, or other person legally authorized to solemnize marriages within that state, is a valid and binding marriage under the laws of this state to the same effect and extent as if solemnized within this state and according to its laws.’
(2) This section does not apply to a marriage contracted between individuals of the same sex, which marriage is invalid in this state under section 1 of chapter 83 of the revised statutes of 1846, being section 551.1 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
551.272 Marriage not between man and woman invalidated.[4]
This state recognizes marriage as inherently a unique relationship between a man and a woman, as prescribed by section 1 of chapter 83 of the Revised Statutes of 1846, being section 551.1 of the Michigan Compiled Laws, and therefore a marriage that is not between a man and a woman is invalid in this state regardless of whether the marriage is contracted according to the laws of another jurisdiction.[/spoiler]

Mississippi:

[spoiler]Mississippi Constitution, Article 14, Section 263A
Marriage may take place and may be valid under the laws of this State only between a man and a woman. A marriage in another State or foreign jurisdiction between persons of the same gender, regardless of when the marriage took place, may not be recognized in this State and is void and unenforceable under the laws of this State.

Mississippi Code § 93-1-1. Certain marriages declared incestuous and void.
(2) Any marriage between persons of the same gender is prohibited and null and void from the beginning. Any marriage between persons of the same gender that is valid in another jurisdiction does not constitute a legal or valid marriage in Mississippi. [5][/spoiler]

Missouri:

[spoiler]Missouri Constitution, Article I Bill of Rights
Section 33.Marriage, validity and recognition.
That to be valid and recognized in this state, a marriage shall exist only between a man and a woman.

Missouri Annotated Statutes - Chapter 451. Marriage, Marriage Contracts, and Rights of Married Women
section 451.022. Public policy, same sex marriages prohibited—license may not be issued.

  1. It is the public policy of this state to recognize marriage only between a man and a woman.
  2. Any purported marriage not between a man and a woman is invalid.
  3. No recorder shall issue a marriage license, except to a man and a woman.
  4. A marriage between persons of the same sex will not be recognized for any purpose in this state even when valid where contracted.[/spoiler]

Montana:

[spoiler]Texts:

Montana Constitution - Article XIII. General Provisions
Section 7. Marriage Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state.

Montana Code Annotated - Title 40. Family law - Chapter 1. Marriage
Section 40-1-103. General Provisions — Formalities.
Marriage is a personal relationship between a man and a woman arising out of a civil contract to which the consent of the parties is essential.
Section 40-1-401. Prohibited marriages– contracts.
(1) The following marriages are prohibited: … (d) a marriage between persons of the same sex.[/spoiler]

Nebraska:

Nebraska Constitution
Article I, Section 29. Marriage; same-sex relationships not valid or recognized. Only marriage between a man and a woman shall be valid or recognized in Nebraska. The uniting of two persons of the same sex in a civil union, domestic partnership, or other similar same-sex relationship shall not be valid or recognized in Nebraska.

Nevada:

Nevada Constitution- Article I. Declaration of Rights.
Section 21. Limitation on recognition of marriage.
Only a marriage between a male and female person shall be recognized and given effect in this state.

North Carolina:

[spoiler]North Dakota Constitution Article XI. General provisions.
Sec. 6. Marriage. - “Marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This section does not prohibit a private party from entering into contracts with another private party; nor does this section prohibit courts from adjudicating the rights of private parties pursuant to such contracts.”

North Carolina General Statutes - Chapter 51. Marriages - Article 1. General Provisions
Section 51‑1. Requisites of marriage; solemnization.
A valid and sufficient marriage is created by the consent of a male and female person who may lawfully marry, presently to take each other as husband and wife, freely, seriously and plainly expressed by each in the presence of the other, either: …

Section 51-1.2. Marriages between persons of the same gender not valid.
Marriages, whether created by common law, contracted, or performed outside of North Carolina, between individuals of the same gender are not valid in North Carolina.[/spoiler]

North Dakota:

[spoiler]North Dakota Constitution Article XI. General provisions.
Art. XI - Section 28. Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman. No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

North Dakota Century Code - Title 14 Domestic Relations and Persons
Section 14-03-01. What constitutes marriage - Spouse defined. Marriage is a personal relation arising out of a civil contract between one man and one woman to which the consent of the parties is essential. The marriage relation may be entered into, maintained, annulled, or dissolved only as provided by law. A spouse refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.
Section 14-03-08. Foreign marriages recognized - Exception. Except when residents of this state contract a marriage in another state which is prohibited under the laws of this state, all marriages contracted outside this state, which are valid according to the laws of the state or country where contracted, are valid in this state. This section applies only to a marriage contracted in another state or country which is between one man and one woman as husband and wife.[/spoiler]

Ohio:

[spoiler]Ohio Constitution - Article XV. Miscellaneous - section 11 Marriage Amendment
Only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this state and its political subdivisions. This state and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance or effect of marriage.

Ohio Revised Code - Title XXXI Domestic Relations - Children
§ 3101.01. Persons who may be joined in marriage; minor to obtain consent; public policy of state concerning same-sex marriage and extension of certain benefits to nonmarital relationships.
(A) … A marriage may only be entered into by one man and one woman. …
(B) …
(C) (1) Any marriage between persons of the same sex is against the strong public policy of this state. Any marriage between persons of the same sex shall have no legal force or effect in this state and, if attempted to be entered into in this state, is void ab initio and shall not be recognized by this state.
(2) Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in any other jurisdiction shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state.
(3) The recognition or extension by the state of the specific statutory benefits of a legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is against the strong public policy of this state. Any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of this state, as defined in section 9.82 of the Revised Code, that extends the specific statutory benefits of legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes is void ab initio. Nothing in division (C)(3) of this section shall be construed to do either of the following:
(a) Prohibit the extension of specific benefits otherwise enjoyed by all persons, married or unmarried, to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes, including the extension of benefits conferred by any statute that is not expressly limited to married persons, which includes but is not limited to benefits available under Chapter 4117. of the Revised Code;
(b) Affect the validity of private agreements that are otherwise valid under the laws of this state.
(4) Any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other state, country, or other jurisdiction outside this state that extends the specific benefits of legal marriage to nonmarital relationships between persons of the same sex or different sexes shall be considered and treated in all respects as having no legal force or effect in this state and shall not be recognized by this state.[/spoiler]

Oklahoma:

Oklahoma Constitution - Article 2 Bill of rights - Section 35
A. Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman. Neither this Constitution nor any other provision of law shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.
B. A marriage between persons of the same gender performed in another state shall not be recognized as valid and binding in this state as of the date of the marriage.
C. Any person knowingly issuing a marriage license in violation of this section shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

Oregon:

[spoiler]Texts:

Oregon Constitution - Article XV Miscellaneous
Section 5a. Policy regarding marriage. It is the policy of Oregon, and its subdivisions, that only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or legally recognized as a marriage.[/spoiler]

South Carolina:

[spoiler]South Carolina Constitution Article XVII Miscellaneous Matters, Section 15
A marriage between one man and one woman is the only lawful domestic union that shall be valid or recognized in this State. This State and its political subdivisions shall not create a legal status, right, or claim respecting any other domestic union, however denominated. This State and its political subdivisions shall not recognize or give effect to a legal status, right, or claim created by another jurisdiction respecting any other domestic union, however denominated. Nothing in this section shall impair any right or benefit extended by the State or its political subdivisions other than a right or benefit arising from a domestic union that is not valid or recognized in this State. This section shall not prohibit or limit parties, other than the State or its political subdivisions, from entering into contracts or other legal instruments.

South Carolina Code of Laws - Title 20. Domestic Relations - Chapter 1. Marriage
Section 20-1-10. Persons who may contract matrimony.
(A) All persons, except mentally incompetent persons and persons whose marriage is prohibited by this section, may lawfully contract matrimony.
(B) No man shall marry his mother, grandmother, daughter, granddaughter, stepmother, sister, grandfather’s wife, son’s wife, grandson’s wife, wife’s mother, wife’s grandmother, wife’s daughter, wife’s granddaughter, brother’s daughter, sister’s daughter, father’s sister, mother’s sister, or another man.
(C) No woman shall marry her father, grandfather, son, grandson, stepfather, brother, grandmother’s husband, daughter’s husband, granddaughter’s husband, husband’s father, husband’s grandfather, husband’s son, husband’s grandson, brother’s son, sister’s son, father’s brother, mother’s brother, or another woman.
SECTION 20-1-15. Prohibition of same sex marriage.
A marriage between persons of the same sex is void ab initio and against the public policy of this State.[/spoiler]

South Dakota:

If you’ve actually gone through each of these spoiler boxes and opened each one, I’m genuinely impressed.

Tennessee:

[spoiler]Tennessee Constitution - Article XI. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
Section 18. Marital contract defined. The historical institution and legal contract solemnizing the relationship of one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be the only legally recognized marital contract in this state. Any policy or law or judicial interpretation, purporting to define marriage as anything other than the historical institution and legal contract between one (1) man and one (1) woman, is contrary to the public policy of this state and shall be void and unenforceable in Tennessee. If another state or foreign jurisdiction issues a license for persons to marry and if such marriage is prohibited in this state by the provisions of this section, then the marriage shall be void and unenforceable in this state.

Tennessee Code Annotated - Title 36. Domestic Relations - Chapter 3. Marriage - Part 1. License
36-3-113. Marriage between one man and one woman only legally recognized marital contract.
(a) Tennessee’s marriage licensing laws reinforce, carry forward, and make explicit the long-standing public policy of this state to recognize the family as essential to social and economic order and the common good and as the fundamental building block of our society. To that end, it is further the public policy of this state that the historical institution and legal contract solemnizing the relationship of one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be the only legally recognized marital contract in this state in order to provide the unique and exclusive rights and privileges to marriage.
(b) The legal union in matrimony of only one (1) man and one (1) woman shall be the only recognized marriage in this state.
(c) Any policy, law or judicial interpretation that purports to define marriage as anything other than the historical institution and legal contract between one (1) man and one (1) woman is contrary to the public policy of Tennessee.
(d) If another state or foreign jurisdiction issues a license for persons to marry, which marriages are prohibited in this state, any such marriage shall be void and unenforceable in this state.[/spoiler]

Texas:

[spoiler]Texas Constitution - Article 1. Bill of Rights - Section 32 - Marriage
(a) Marriage in this state shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman.
(b) This state or a political subdivision of this state may not create or recognize any legal status identical or similar to marriage.

Texas Family Code - TITLE 1. The marriage relationship
Chapter 2. The marriage relationship - Section 2.001. Marriage licence.
(a) A man and a woman desiring to enter into a ceremonial marriage must obtain a marriage license from the county clerk of any county of this state.
(b) A license may not be issued for the marriage of persons of the same sex.
Chapter 6. Suit for dissolution of marriage - Section 6.204. Recognition of same-sex marriage of union.

(a) In this section, “civil union” means any relationship status other than marriage that:
(1) is intended as an alternative to marriage or applies primarily to cohabitating persons; and
(2) grants to the parties of the relationship legal protections, benefits, or responsibilities granted to the spouses of a marriage.
(b) A marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union is contrary to the public policy of this state and is void in this state.
(c) The state or an agency or political subdivision of the state may not give effect to a:
(1) public act, record, or judicial proceeding that creates, recognizes, or validates a marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union in this state or in any other jurisdiction; or
(2) right or claim to any legal protection, benefit, or responsibility asserted as a result of a marriage between persons of the same sex or a civil union in this state or in any other jurisdiction.[/spoiler]

Utah:

[spoiler]Utah Constitution - Article 01. Declaration of Rights
Section 29. Marriage.
(1) Marriage consists only of the legal union between a man and a woman.
(2) No other domestic union, however denominated, may be recognized as a marriage or given the same or substantially equivalent legal effect.

Utah Code - Title 30. Husband and Wife - Chapter 01. Marriage
30-1-4.1. Marriage recognition policy.
(1) (a) It is the policy of this state to recognize as marriage only the legal union of a man and a woman as provided in this chapter.
(b) Except for the relationship of marriage between a man and a woman recognized pursuant to this chapter, this state will not recognize, enforce, or give legal effect to any law creating any legal status, rights, benefits, or duties that are substantially equivalent to those provided under Utah law to a man and a woman because they are married.
(2) Nothing in Subsection (1) impairs any contract or other rights, benefits, or duties that are enforceable independently of this section.[/spoiler]

Virginia:

[spoiler]Virginia Constitution - Article I. Bill of Rights - Section 15-A. Marriage.
That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions.
This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

Code of Virginia - Title 20. Domestic relations
§ 20-45.2. Marriage between persons of same sex.
A marriage between persons of the same sex is prohibited. Any marriage entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created by such marriage shall be void and unenforceable.
§ 20-45.3. Civil unions between persons of same sex.
A civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement between persons of the same sex purporting to bestow the privileges or obligations of marriage is prohibited. Any such civil union, partnership contract or other arrangement entered into by persons of the same sex in another state or jurisdiction shall be void in all respects in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby shall be void and unenforceable.[/spoiler]

Wisconsin:

Wisconsin Constitution - Article XIII. Miscellaneous provisions
Section 13. Marriage. Only a marriage between one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state. A legal status identical or substantially similar to that of marriage for unmarried individuals shall not be valid or recognized in this state.
Wisconsin Statutes - Chapter 765. The Family Code (765-768)
765.001(2) Intent. - Extract:
… Under the laws of this state, marriage is a legal relationship between 2 equal persons, a husband and wife, who owe to each other mutual responsibility and support…
765.01 A civil contract.
Marriage, so far as its validity at law is concerned, is a civil contract, to which the consent of the parties capable in law of contracting is essential, and which creates the legal status of husband and wife.
765.04 Marriage abroad to circumvent the laws.
(1) If any person residing and intending to continue to reside in this state who is disabled or prohibited from contracting marriage under the laws of this state goes into another state or country and there contracts a marriage prohibited or declared void under the laws of this state, such marriage shall be void for all purposes in this state with the same effect as though it had been entered into in this state.
(3) No marriage shall be contracted in this state by a party residing and intending to continue to reside in another state or jurisdiction, if such marriage would be void if contracted in such other state or jurisdiction and every marriage celebrated in this state in violation of this provision shall be null and void.
765.30 Penalties.
(1) The following may be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than 9 months or both:
(a) Penalty for marriage outside the state to circumvent the laws. Any person residing and intending to continue to reside in this state who goes outside the state and there contracts a marriage prohibited or declared void under the laws of this state.

And those are just the constitutional bans. I left out the states that banned SSM without amending their state constitution.

How could you possibly have been unaware of this?

Lots of Democrats have called him a white supremacist who’s running concentration camps. It’s only the dark skinned ones that he’s said should be run out of the country. Do you think there’s no racial element behind him saying that to people who were born here, like Ocasio-Cortez or Pressley?

You didn’t say anything about political parties. You specifically said “race” and “sexual preference.”

I guess that broad brush is okay when it’s in your hand, huh? I mean, you’re after me as a bigot because I said Republicans are more racist than Democrats, and then you post this about liberals? To be clear, I’m not mad about the broad brush - amused, mostly, since it’s so thoroughly disconnected from reality - but the hypocrisy here is a bit much.

Why don’t Republicans go after them as well, then? If the party is so much less racist than the Democrats, and the Republican ideas are so manifestly superior to Democratic ideas, why don’t the Republicans do more to pick up votes there? The Democrats do a bunch of “worthy and admirable” work to get their votes - why don’t the Republicans do the same thing? And when they do, why doesn’t it work?

I have never made any claim or representation that I am remotely competent or well suited to my position here.

Let me give you one hint about why the Republican party has a lot of trouble attracting minority support. When you take judging someone on incidental and uncontrollable aspects of their person like race or sexuality, and conflating it with judging someone on the basis of their stated beliefs and politics, it sends a pretty strong message that, at best, you have no idea what bigotry actually is or why it’s bad. At worst, it indicates that you do understand those things, and want to confuse the issue so nothing can be done about them.

I judge Republicans negatively because they routinely support policies and politicians that I find morally reprehensible. If they’d stop supporting people like Donald Trump, or Steve Knight, or Roy Moore, I’d stop judging them negatively. If they stop pushing policies like legally protecting anti-gay discrimination, locking immigrants in cages for days with no running water, or passing laws to keep Muslims out of the country, I’ll stop calling them bigots.

Cite that there are abused?

Really Scilla, you may forget that racism is in reality a very virulent form of ignorance. To conclude that abuse is made by most of the immigrants is silly. (there is really little to support the idea that no immigrates with good reasons to emigrate are doing it just for abusing this)

What Trump is doing is not rational for an immigration policy, but “logical” to appease a bigoted base that supports the administration.

“Some”. That’s a particularly uninformative word here. I’m sure you’d agree that no matter how solid the evidence that something was motivated by racism, “some” Republicans will claim it is not, right?

They have both been critical of different aspects of American society and institutions.

She said something anti Semitic which she recognized and later apologized for. Democrats criticized her for it and she apologized.

Trump has said numerous racist and bigoted things and apologized for none of them. Virtually all Republicans in office continue to support him and have not demanded he apologize.

Those are very different circumstances, and they say very different things about the two individuals and the two parties.