Tennessee GOP quietly overturns marriage equality by giving officials the right to refuse
Tennessee GOP quietly overturns marriage equality by giving officials the right to refuse
Public officials in Tennessee can now refuse to grant a marriage license to anyone at their own discretion, for any reason.
Public officials in Tennessee can now refuse to grant a marriage license to anyone at their own discretion, for any reason.
Republican Gov. Bill Lee signed into law House Bill 878 on Wednesday, which took effect immediately. The bill — just a few sentences in length — only states that "a person shall not be required to solemnize a marriage." Only state notary publics, government officials, and religious figures can "solemnize" a marriage in Tennessee, according to state code.
None of the sponsors behind the bill have been made public statements on its introduction or passage, nor have they given comment to media organizations. The only known remarks regarding the law from state Rep. Monty Fritts (take a guess), who sponsored it in the House, are from February of last year, when he spoke to the state Subcommittee on Children and Family Affairs.
“As societal views change about what constitutes a marriage, officiants must be able to refuse to solemnize marriages that are contrary to their beliefs. The government has a responsibility to protect the exercise of religious beliefs," he said, via CNN. "Those with the authority to perform civil ceremonies would also be permitted to refuse to solemnize marriage for reasons of conscience.”
So if someone's religion did not believe "christianity" was a valid religion, they could refuse to give a license to a christian couple.
Be careful what power you give the people, they can use it against you.This is the only way anything like this changes. Hopefully some folks at city hall will do just this and turn it around on the doofuses.
Kim Davis flashbacks.
TIL She had a meeting with the Pope).
After receiving a surprise phone call from a church official, the Kentucky county clerk says she traveled to Washington, D.C., where she and her husband Joe met the pope Sept. 24 at the Vatican Embassy.
“I put my hand out and he reached and he grabbed it, and I hugged him and he hugged me,” Davis said. “And he said, ‘thank you for your courage.’”
Religious freedom only exists to enforce religion and deny other freedoms.
Satanic Temple, if you're reading this...
Ordained Ministers of Satan can perform weddings...but they're more about proving a point by allowing everyone to do something, rather than by restricting people. So they'd be good ones to go to to officiate marriages if refused elsewere.
Unfortunately, one of the conservatives' strategies at play here is they only give "right of conscience" to people with political power over other people.
They aren't giving normal citizens the right to object to anything, they're giving unelected officers the right to torment those beneath them.
And unless you're willing to be as evil to innocent people as they are, you can't fight that war.
In the end what they're destroying here is the rule of law itself.
Only if good people can get into the public offices in the first place.
No cookie for guessing what will the secret interview question to become a marriage officer will be in those States.
“Not if we gerrymander and marginalize them, until our great Leader returns and removes them all.” - (voters who wish to remain anonymous)
Yes.
Honestly I don't see the problem. If someone wants a religious ceremony then they should agree to the rules of that religion. If they religion doesn't want to do it that should be religious freedom.
If they don't want a religious ceremony then they can get a civil partnership or whatever which is legally the same without the religious marriage. Or go to another religion.
Religion is stupid in my opinion and the more ridiculous it is allowed to be (excluding forcing children or people outside of the religion to do things) then I think fucking go for it, it will allow people to see the ridiculousness and turn people off.
In the name of Baphoment, ruler of Satan, prince of darkness, I pronounce you man and whore!
County clerks are an elected position in TN. If someone were to refuse to sanctify Christian unions then they would be out of a job the next election cycle or more likely removed from office.
The most terrifying aspect is that it isn't just gay marriage at stake here - Interracial marriages, atheist marriages, inter-abled marriages.. ALL marriages are at risk if a person you've never met won't sign a piece of paper.
Find one who refuses to marry Republicans, or whites, or straight couples and watch the bitching fly.
Be funnier if alot went along with it.
Moonies do have a religious argument against solemnizing same race marriages. They won’t, and they’re a cult, but they are the only religion to my knowledge to prioritize interracial marriage
Very well. Despite having no power to perform a wedding and certainly not in a state I have only been to one time in my life I am officially declaring that I will not marry a straight couple. It umm goes against my religion. The first church of anidiotsayswhat.
Your love Tennessee, your move
I'm trans, that's been the case for me.... my entire gender identity at one point hinged on me making empty legal threats I had no way to back up to gaslight people at the DMV to sign off on something that I already had enough legal documentation to get signed off on.
There was a time when I was federally Female and in my state Male.
Thank God the bitch behind the register who kept using "It" and "They" to refer to me didn't call my bluff about "Coming back with my Lawyer"... soon as I said that, she clammed up, used the correct pronouns and gave me an F on the gender marker.
Personally I think marriages should only be allowed if both people own a domestic vehicle.
Interracial marriage is safe until Justice Thomas hits a rough spot in his marriage.
What’s done in secret brings public shame. Those legislators are a disgrace.
Agreed. Unfortunately, the Tennessee House of Reps have been making an ass of themselves for quite some time and it may not change any time soon. Though one can hope voters start doing the right thing and ousting these conniving bigots.
Looks like they remembered that three new conservative Supreme Court justices had been added, and figured it was time to start chipping away at gay marriage.
And...This is what happens when the Supreme Court decides stare decisis is optional. If the Court doesn't respect prior decisions, be prepared for every single issue to be re-litigated after members are added to or leave the Court.
GOP continue to be pieces of trash. I really wish the party would just die off, but Trumpism gave them a bolder fascist to believe in.
Now tell me, what do you think about banks refusing service to LibsofTikTok ?
Agreed! Refusing to service customers based on their Sexual Orientation is EXACTLY like refusing to service customers who use your service to threaten to bomb Elementary Schools and Children's Hospitals!
Anyone who defends Chaya Raichik should be dumped in the same pit with her. I'm just glad you assholes always out yourselves.
Love it. We don't need official institutions enabling hatred. Yes, banks are evil otherwise, but we don't need public culture war nonsense from them as well.
Sounds good to me. Go fash, go die in the trash.
It's a good start? Can we punch them in other places that hurt? More please?
Take your pick. I feel all 3 earnestly.
A government official ought to be bound to perform their duty to all citizens whereas a bank is allowed to pick and choose whom it will do business with. Anything else I can clear up for you chief?
Private businesses can refuse service to those they don't want to do business with as long as they aren't doing it on race, gender, sexuality or something along those lines. A shitty tiktoker doesn't have that protection.
banks are part of the government?
no?
this is a pointless argument then.
Fucking SCOTUS bait. This is to overturn Hodges
And Loving v. Virginia is next.
In case anyone else was wondering, you might know this case better as Obergefell (since SCOTUS cases are typically informally called by the plaintiff's name).
Oh please let someone refuse to marry a hetero couple.
They will if they're mixed race.
I had an Ortho Jewish professor for several college classes relay casually in class one day t that neither he nor his RC wife converted to marry and her church declined to bury her with head to marker because of her heresy. It's not that big of a stretch back to that. We're regressing.
Abrahamic genre for extra-spicy kick?
I think we non-Americans never hear names of these states in postive context.
We Americans don't either.
In general, the cities in red states are very progressive. New Orleans and Miami are two of the least small-c conservative cities you’ll find in the U.S., more akin to San Francisco than a place like Boston. (Boston has amazing universities and is progressive in policy but it was founded by puritans and isn’t exactly known for it’s late night parties and festivals.)
By contrast, more Californians voted for Trump than Texans. It’s mostly an urban/rural divide at this point and whether your state government is a horror show or not depends on whether your cities are large enough to create a majority after districts are drawn.
Also, there’s a lot of outrageous bills introduced by one state rep that will never get a vote. But they know they’ll result in clickbait articles and help them gain notoriety.
By contrast, more Californians voted for Trump than Texans. It’s mostly an urban/rural divide at this point and whether your state government is a horror show or not depends on whether your cities are large enough to create a majority after districts are drawn.
Exactly. It's a knock on-effect from the way our state and federal systems work that you can actually pull off a veto-proof legislative supermajority in a state like North Carolina, that went for Trump by literally 1.5% and has a Democrat as governor. Even in Texas, the margin in presidential elections is persistent and significant but is about 5:4. There is no one state full of assholes while someplace else is full of only smart and good people.
That's an astute observation.
TN is home not only to a motivated republican political class bent on ensuring their continued role overseeing the state's people and determining what access to medical care should be available, but also to the Country Music Hall of Fame and to Jack Daniels Distillery. The latter is interesting and getting there takes you through beautiful country, but you should know it's located in a "dry county" before you go and their products can't be sold there.
TN is also the last state I'm aware of where fire departments were in recent years permitted to respond only to protect neighboring property rather than to protect the property which was actually on fire; but had not paid its subscription service
Well, that last doesn't exactly cast it in a positive light, either. But that's life in a red state for ya, there's a whole lot of gorgeous country that is (politically) painted bright red, unfortunately. While I've little need to travel presently, there aren't many southern states I'd go out of my way to spend money in, if I could help it.
It's a real shame, because there is so much non-shit in these places too. As someone from one of these states (Ohio), it makes me sad to see my home turned into a punchline and a cautionary tale because of what the extremists have done. Sometimes it feels like we've been abandoned :(
Like your close neighbor WV, just take pride in not being Mississippi.
The people are friendly during the day, the food tastes good, the natural beauty is something else, and if your car breaks down chances are someone young will fix it for free someone old will give you a ride into town plus most of them have a 3rd worlder work ethic that allows them to build in temperatures that should kill you.
At the same time southern rage is a real plus scary thing and none of them are that far from lynching.
and if your car breaks down chances are someone young will fix it for free someone old will give you a ride into town
If you pass as white.
If you live in this shit states the most important thing you can do in your whole life is leave.
As someone who did, I understand the sentiment but it isn't that easy. I have so many friends and family members who are stuck there because they can't save enough resources to leave.
People are like marching through the American Southwest desert into a country actively trying to stop them which speaks a totally different language and with children and they can't move within their native country?
I did it. I grew up in deep Appalachia. Packed a backpack and went on a bus. That is no where near the difficulty level an illegal faces.
Its really unfortunate because one of the best national labs in the country is in Tennessee.
Ornl complains about brain drain all the time!
Tennesseeans are dumb as shit.
Or fucking vote.
Leaving is rarely an option for the people most in danger or most oppressed anyway.
They yearn to be the first christofacist state. They have some competition with Alabama raising their game with embryos
Thankfully, not everyone around here is a bigot. My officiator was an employee at the DMV who was very happy to be a part of my gay wedding in the DMV parking lot. Three years this August.
In before "you need to be licensed to officiate in AL" and "our licensing board can refuse to license on moral grounds".
I REFUSE to sign off on Republican Marriages!
Congress should just pass a law to allow online marriage services so someone in a progressive state can marry anyone who needs to get married in a shithole state.
I can re-register my car, re-issue my license, change or verify my voter info online, even all the gods hope file my taxes online cheaply(cough free) these days. I dont see why two consenting adults who both file the info shouldn't be able to... but then minds would explode. I mean we recently found out that alabama thinks that eggs are actual humans, which opens so many food based questions I'll stop going.
Make all federal recognition of marriage based on a federal license.
"We don't want to get rid of gay marriage" yea fuckers, we knew you were full of shit deplorables. This is beyond the fucking pale.
I think we should get rid of marriages entirely. It's bad, complicated law, and the people getting into it often don't understand it. Plus religion sucks ass. There has to be a better way to share assets and custody and taxes.
How would you handle sponsorship for immigration?
if i say she's my girlfriend then she's obviously not a terrorist, right?
Not a huge concern but I do fear polygamist taking advantage. That's not to say polygamy is inherently bad. Just from what I know of polygamy it's usually patriarchal and used to prey on vulnerable women.
a monogamist can do that too
Isn't this a federal law though? Is it normal practice to allow states to supercede federal law if they arbitrarily want to?
It's skirting the federal law by allowing all officials to refuse anyone for any reason. If they just said "no gay marriage in this state" or didn't recognize the union of married gay couples that would be illegal.
It's fucked up, and the intention is clear, but I'm sure the remaining officiants that will perform ceremonies for same sex couples will make themselves known and they will be busy.
I’m sure the remaining officiants that will perform ceremonies for same sex couples will make themselves known and they will be busy.
Unfortunately they will also likely be targeted by extremists.
Also, it doesn't skirt federal law, per the article:
the Constitution prohibits public officials from discriminating against members of the public based on their personal beliefs
This might not cover all officiants, eg priests, but it covers state notary publics and government officials, which is really all this law is targeting anyway (I think religious people could already refuse).
I think they can still be sued if it's shown that they refuse only gay people. If they only married white people for instance they would absolutely be reamed in court.
What this does do is shift when the lawsuit can happen. Now we have to wait for evidence they they're discriminating since the law itself is not discriminatory.
If the person doesn't refuse to solemnize any other people other than gays it will be pretty damn easy to establish what they are doing. Also "religious" figure is pretty up in the air there is an online course that allows anyone to become an officiant. I guess there is money to be made in being a no frills gay officiant of a secular nature.
Time to pack their local government with allies and refuse some hetero marriages 😎
This headline is so headline grabby. Sure the local fucking bigot won't do it, but practically anyone can qualify as eligible for solemnizing a marriage.
I think it's real shitty what they did and are trying to do, don't get me wrong, but LGBTQ are not going away and there's a lot more supporters than haters out there. Even in red states many supporters remain silent to avoid the loud dumb bigots.
Sure, but is issuing a marriage license "solemnizing" the marriage?
The real issue here is that public employees are allowed to bestow different services on different members of the public just based on how they feel. In a Good Old Boys jurisdiction, this could in practice outlaw gay marriage because all it takes is a consistent hiring practice to only get the "right kind" of clerk who won't issue gay marriage licenses, and it becomes impossible to get one. That can happen in significant percentages of jurisdictions.
Sure, it violates equal protection Constitutional rights, but somehow I think this Supreme Court would find that First Amendment "right to express religious bigotry" wins if those are in conflict.
Edit: I don't have time to review the statute but Shadrach makes good points. If that's accurate to the statute, that wouldn't allow clerks to refuse to issue marriage licenses.
Sure, but is issuing a marriage license “solemnizing” the marriage?
No. The County Clerk's office issues marriage licenses before the marriage is solemnized, and the officiant who solemnizes the marriage then turns the license back in, completed.
Basically you get issued the license to permit the marriage, someone accepts that paperwork and solemnizes the marriage (usually in some variety of ceremony, as befits your cultural and religious preferences), then that person (the officiant) completes the license and submits it back to the state to inform them it's been done.
The Tennessee law in question essentially says that just because someone is allowed to officiate a marriage in Tennessee doesn't mean they are required to if they have some issue with the pairing. AKA you can't force a preacher from a decidedly anti-LGBT church to marry you just because they are a preacher. Likewise for not being able to force the local Grand Wizard to solemnize your interracial marriage. Or any other reason someone might not want to officiate literally every marriage presented to them.
Sure, it violates equal protection Constitutional rights,
Does it? It's not a state employee performing their job function that's given this leeway. The County Clerk is still required to issue the marriage license and is still required to accept and process completed ones, even if they disagree with those pairings.
It's the person performing the wedding that is given leeway to decide who they are willing to marry, and the options there are broad enough that it doesn't meaningfully restrict you (there are about 102,000 notaries public as well as an assortment of current and former elected officials and literally any clergy of any faith).
I can see making an exception for "religious figures" but the idea that a public servant, like a government official or to lesser extent notary public, can deny service to someone based on their personal beliefs is problematic and certainly something that should be reported on.
They're doing this to tee up a challenge to Obergefell.
"real shitty"
does that mean it doesn't affect you so fuck it who cares ? Because we did that in the USA for centuries and fuck that. It was real shittier.
does that mean it doesn’t affect you so fuck it who cares ?
No
Why are the conservatives so homophobic? Are they having sex with your husbands or something?
I had a gay man hit me in a gay bar. I said sorry I'm straight and he called me a tease. I was sorta flattered. This must be what females feel all the time.
Wait.. aren't you people the same one's telling everyone they can't tell you what to do with your body, but here you want to demand someone give up their choice? If one person refuses, move on to the next. A lot of you don't understand the word freedom, or hypocrite.
For a business to discriminate in many parts of the US, there may be only 1 bakery, or bank, or car rental place, etc. Some places are small, you can't just "go to someone else" when you only have One option. Almost all business are considered “places of public accommodation”.
For government to discriminate we have the same issue. Many offices have very few employees in MOST of the US. Only large metropolitan cities have, almost adequate, staff. There are not 100 court clerks in Podunk Alabama, or Nowhere Nevada. These places probably have 1 clerk doing multiple jobs.
If you own a business, or work in a government job, you serve the public. That means every nice person, and every freak you hate. This ain't no hamburger at Burger King, you don't get to "have it your way".