Conservatives push to overturn same-sex marriage: "Just a matter of when"
Conservatives push to overturn same-sex marriage: "Just a matter of when"
Some Christian conservatives are working to overturn the Supreme Court ruling that enshrines same-sex marriage.
Summary
Conservative lawmakers and activists are pushing to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver declared, "It’s just a matter of when."
Some legislators, like Oklahoma Senator David Bullard, are introducing bills to challenge the ruling, while Justices Thomas and Alito have signaled interest in reconsidering it.
Though most Americans support same-sex marriage, the court’s conservative shift is concerning.
The 2022 Respect for Marriage Act ensures federal recognition but does not prevent states from restricting same-sex marriage if Obergefell is overturned.
One thing they're going after is adoption and surrogacy.
According to project 2025. A child shall be raised by their biological mother and father.
Queer erasure won't end with TQ. They'll go after LGB too.
That hits divorce, IVF, and IUI for heteros as well
dude just look at the taliban and know that's where we're headed. except jesus flavored. divorce is irrelevant if all you have to do is accuse your wife of something and..."redeem your family's honor"
and if the (forced into marriage) wife wants a divorce? "LOL shut your filthy whore mouth and get back in the kitchen"
"You will live as we tell you to"
Yep, that's the goal. Only the wealthy, who are otherwise protected from the arm of the law, will be the only ones who are not just chattel for the workhouses.
They need more workers? Impregnate more women via IVF, with the "economic exclusion" that will be crafted into law, that only applies to the workplace. Why worry about divorce when your master is choosing for you? Too many workers to feed? UID, ordered by your master.
They control everything for the working class, even the reproductive cycle. Even love needs to be removed from the equation. 1984 laid out the "why" for it all.
Orphan crushing machine comes one step closer to reality
Adoption, in many cases, contributes to a situation where pregnant people are coerced into giving up their child. It's a problem most people don't want to hear about, though, like most problems primarily faced by women.
Not all cases though. So project 2025 is going to be pretty damaging even in this area.
My supervisor is a hardcore trumper - and also a lesbian who proudly talks about her wife. Nothing that is happening now is good, but it will at least be a little amusing to hear her "but the leopards weren't supposed to eat my face!" lamentations.
Any LGBTQ person that voted for Trump deserves what they get. I have no sympathy for a person that can’t do the most basic google search and has no interest in bettering the world for other people.
The only reason most people voted for Trump was Money or Immigrants. Two of the most selfish reasons.
don’t forget racism
plenty of racist gays, how they manage to rationalize it i don’t know but I personally know a few
throw in a large helping of self hatred
Yeah.. she’s fucked. I wouldn’t be surprised if they anull every non-hetero marriage. And sadly, all the faces eaten by leopards will be of little consolation to those hurt by this.
Maybe that's the long game. There are worse ways to get out of a relationship.
And then they will come after them for back taxes or something.
She'll just blame Democrats and the left, somehow.
I actually know a few people in LGBTQ who voted for Bronzo the Clown. Have not heard their reactions to how things have been going since he took office.
Meanwhile a ton of conservatives are closeted gays
If they can't be openly gay and comfortable in their own skin, no one can be. I fucking hate Republicans.
foot tapping echo gets louder
"wide stance".
im not gay! im deeply closeted!
I once heard an old trans prostitute talking about her time in the 80s. As her friends and chosen family were dying en masse, she had a client who was an anti gay politician. She said how she once asked him why he was doing such things if he was the sort of person who'd seek out a trans sex worker in the 1980s and become her regular, and his response was that if he didn't do it he'd lose his election and someone else would.
At the same time you had in the 50s Mccarthy getting teased in the senate for being gay while running an anti gay purge of the government.
Idk. I've long held that the reason that so many conversion camp operators wind up coming out eventually is that we wind up drawn to doing the dirty work in service of ideologies opposed to us for a variety of reasons such as self hate, the need to prove we aren't like them, etc.
Though most Americans support same-sex marriage, the court’s conservative shift is concerning.
This is all anyone needs to understand on the subject. They don’t give a shit about what the majority wants anymore- as they’re making it known far-and-wide that they are no longer employed by us. They’re employed by themselves.
They have a fairly large group that isn't going to change their votes either way. Then, they have another group that actually might stay home, but things like this motivates them. They don't have to care about the parts of their base that aren't going to change their mind.
Uh, yeah. They overturned Roe vs Wade, also supported by the majority and Republicans and Democrats. They don't give a shit what The People want...
More people need to see this comment.
Yep. They didn't give a flying fuck about public sentiment on the right to abortion, either.
christian terrorists strike again
So ... when are they going back to legalising child marriage and removing divorce?
They’re already working on it.
https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/no-fault-divorce-advocates-fret-vance-ban/
I love how none of them ever had grandparents that got "divorced" before no-fault. You know what you did a lot of the time before no-fault if you wanted out? Killed your husband. Wives, when they were forced with a situation where they couldn't simply leave the state/country, would just poison their spouse. In the early 1900s, when your wife was often the one who was at home all the time, preparing all your meals, it was INCREDIBLY easy to do in a way that looked like "oh well he just kept getting sicker and sicker".
Child marriage is already legal. We don't have to go back to that.
No-Fault divorce is already on the chopping block.
'Til death do us part' is gonna be the only option soon, just an FYI for my peeps in abusive relationships out there.
Well there is a clause in there.
Child marriages were never banned in the US. Hell, the GOP has been pushing to lower the age of consent from 18 already, and carving more and more pedo loopholes into the law.
Like, it's not being a pedo, if you raised her from aged 4 (ie, child from previous marriage), and married her at 16, because "She loves Daddy so much!". Or, it's not being a rapist if you're a good swimmer. And, well, divorce... That's pretty hard for some women, in some states, already.
Holy shit. This is fucking huge.
This is fourth reich shit, non-hyperbole. The definition of "First they came for the communists..."
What do you think will come next? Banning interracial marriage? Banning divorce and women having bank accounts? Or banning speaking anything that is critical of the regime.
People need to start freaking out about this right now, not when they're already on the otherside of ghettos and barbed wire fences.
Of course it is. Did you ever believe that it would stop at trans people?
The definition of "First they came for the communists..."
It has been like that when they first agitated in favor of bathroom and sports segregation, but many let it slide because they were all cis-genderist inside.
If only some trans advocates had warned that the anti-trans movement threatens the core of fundamental freedoms... Oh wait they did, but we called them nazis for not catering to our cisgenderism.
So yes, we reach the point where they also come for the gays, and of course they will come for women and black people. They have let on this shit very publicly.
I only sometimes history did not repeat itself sooo sarcastically.
TL;DR We told you so. Now join the resistance.
Well, they are probably going to come for the birth control and sex toys next.
But if they come for interracial marriage, I bet Clarence is going to be one of the most pikachu-faced motherfuckers (besides Peter Thiel?) on the planet. He thought he was one of the GOOD ones. Turns out they never approved of him OR his marriage...
Also, I want to add - this is not that huge, at least in the sense that it's not at all surprising. I'm pretty sure Trollito and pals signaled they wanted to end Obergefell, as well as decisions on contraceptives and sodomy. Technically, a blowjob is sodomy. I wonder how many cishet men know that? I also don't think it will be enforced for any of the insiders. I doubt the Sodomy Police are going to kick in the doors of fElon's house when he's getting a beej from one of his baby-mamas.
The only thing that is the least bit surprising (to me, anyway) is how many people ignored that this is who and what the cons really are. They are not for freedom. They hate people exercising their freedoms. They think THEY should decide who marries who. That THEY should decide how family planning is done. And that THEY get to decide what sexual encounters are allowed. And that THEY get to decide even how many dildos people own.
Also: what kind of pervert concerns themselves to this degree about what consenting adults do? It's sick.
im betting THomas will be estatic when she can get rid of his wife, also thiel can just flee to NEW ZEALAND with his hubby.
The rate they're going, we won't need to wait long to find out.
Don't forget separate areas on the bus and theatre for coloured folk. Gotta regress fully.
hitler only took 53 days to gain full control of germany,.
Banning interracial marriage
Banning? No, probably not; Thomas' wife is white. (As is Thomas, aside from his skin color.) OTOH, they'll probably say that it's up to the states to allow it or not, and whether or not they want to respect the interracial marriages performed by other states.
You really think the rules will apply to the ruling class?
and whether or not they want to respect the interracial marriages performed by other states.
That'll require some very entertaining twisting of the full faith and credit clause, or do you think we'll be well past the point where they even go through the motions to pretend to have a legal rationale for anything they're doing by the time this happens?
All while pretending to be libertarians.
While Libertarians spread the "both sides" false equivalency and mark 'R' on their ballots...
"Gay marriage violates the nap somehow" like they've already been doing that for abortion
We're already on the south shore of the Rubicon for me. The line of no return has already been crossed. Add this to the list of why this regime must be stopped.
GOP delenda est.
"Liberty Council" seems to take away liberties. Yup. That sounds like conservatives all right.
Very "Ministry of Truth" of them.
Liberty Council
If nothing else, qons can always be counted on to take meanings of words and employ them in ways that are not the meanings normal people have.
Take for instance, their use of the terms and phrases: liberty, freedom, patriotism, small government, and political correctness.
These are the exact same types of assholes that would think nothing of putting a motto like "Arbeit macht frei" on a goddamn concentration camp.
And after that I'm sure inter-racial marriage will be next. Fuck these people
And Thomas would vote to repeal without a second thought.
In his concurring opinion on Dobbs (eliminating constitutional protection for abortion), Thomas wrote:
The Court today declines to disturb substantive due process jurisprudence generally or the doctrine’s application in other, specific contexts. Cases like Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U. S. 479 (1965) (right of married persons to obtain contraceptives)*; Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U. S. 558 (2003) (right to engage in private, consensual sexual acts); and Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U. S. 644 (2015) (right to same-sex marriage), are not at issue.
This is basically a list of precedent cases he wants the court to revisit. The conspicuously absent case is Loving v. Virginia, which is what protects interracial marriage. There's also a pretty obvious reason why: he's in an interracial marriage.
They’re speed running to mandatory married missionary under the portraits territory.
“Sodomy” in an executive order soon.
Gay marriage seems inevitable and just the start.
"I don't know how you think things could get worse for LGBT folk in the US than they currently are!" - Very Useful Idiots, 2024
Dear LGB Drop The T losers
You played yourself, they were never concerned about "my kind" appropriating "your kind", they were never after us, they were always after you, we were just in the way.
First they came for the Trans people...
First they came for the communists.
When you sell yourself out as a lapdog, don't be surprised if you end up reaping what you sow.
They were after all of us. We wouldn't've been spared by not being in the way
By being "in the way", I mostly mean society had moved on from "The Gay Debate" and was now onto the "Trans Debate"
The Conservatives needed to end the "Trans Debate" in their favor, even if by force moreso than actual public opinion, before they could turn back time to undo the "Gay Debate" ended in a way they didn't like
I hate this country. My loving marriage has far more right to exist than these ghouls'
Agree entirely on the value judgement but it's not a right if a single party can remove it.
It should have been written into the damn constitution with an ammendment along with bodily autonomy for women. But that would have taken some guts and foresight by the democratic leaders.
Now it's too late.
That's the thing about rights.
There's no such thing as a "God-given right." Rights are earned by fighting. By bloodshed and tears. And they're lost once again by complacency.
It should have been written into the damn constitution with an ammendment along with bodily autonomy for women. But that would have taken some guts and foresight by the democratic leaders.
An amendment would have taken 38 state legislatures ratifying it. There aren't 38 state legislatures likely to pass ratification of an amendment that guarantees a right for any two adults to marry without exception and also guarantees a right for any woman to terminate any pregnancy without exception at her will.
That's probably tied for the lowest odds any hypothetical amendment has of being ratified.
that would have taken some guts and foresight by the democratic leaders.
My understanding is that constitutional amendments also take a high bar to pass with 2/3 of states agreeing to the proposal and 3/4 ratifying. Given the issues getting even more basic things through the Senate/House I could definitely see this getting blocked by red states.
I'm worried about Loving v. Virginia, at this point!
I believe Clarence Thomas and his wife are so corrupt that he will literally vote to end interracial marriage- including his own.
I wish the media would stop saying 'conservative' and start saying 'fascist'.
Just more government fingers in places they shouldn't be from the party of supposedly small government.
Obvious it was coming but that doesn't make it hurt any less.
… I said, wiping his load from my eye.
I just love the hypocrisy from republicans. They preach smaller government, but are always the first in line to take rights and freedoms away from those they dislike.
They may tell you otherwise, but their actions say they want to govern based on their own warped "Christian" ideals.
MAGA needs to unfuck themselves, and remember that this is a secular nation. You may not like who someone loves or that they worship a different god, or no god at all. Guess what? It's none of your damn business. And it certainly isn't a basis for treating people differently.
Republicans are either too stupid to understand the hypocrisy or actively engage in it specifically because they enjoy trolling.
Conservatives with a semblance of coherent thought are Democrats.
Anyone that actually understands the system knows both parties are right of center and left is basically a boogie man with no real-world presence in the US.
I just love the hypocrisy from republicans. They preach smaller government, but are always the first in line to take rights and freedoms away from those they dislike.
More than anything else, their inability to perceive the friction between these stances is what frustrates me the most about conservatives, and convinces me that all their supposed "values" are just the high sounding words they use to justify various forms of bigotry and control.
Another amazing contradiction they never manage to grasp lies among the subpopulation of MAGAs that call themselves libertarian. I had a right-wing friend that freely professed libertarian viewpoints for years. Railed against the government for even getting involved in social issues. Now, like many of the rest of em, he's one of the biggest apologists for reproductive care restrictions and reigning in the press...
I'm not sure if it's the hivemind or they just really can't stand a world full of differences they have to endure.
The gop, putin, fox, and right wing media has gotten them in such a knot that they cant untie themselves. they almost became selfware with luigi, when MSM dint realized by blasting him 24/7 was actually hurting them.
Waaaahhh! Someone is different than me so they should be banned
🤣🤣🤣
many of the the gop men are in sham marriages anyways, they have to project somehow.
This but unironically.
Yeah because it matters who you marry.
No tax breaks for the gays*
*unless they're billionaires
It's much worse than that. Jim Obergefell's case was based on him not being allowed to see his dying husband. If anything happens to me and I'm seriously injured Obergefell v Hodges means my wife will be called and allowed to make medical and mortuary decisions for me instead of those responsibilities falling on the father who hasn't spoken to me since I came out of the closet a decade ago.
If they aren't stopped, it's only a matter of time before women won't be able to own property, take loans or have credit in their names, and maybe even have bank accounts in their own name. Only men will be able to file for divorce. etc, etc.
Right. Any kind of fiscal autonomy means any uppity women are a flight risk and they need to be brought to heel and kept within states that enact the most draconian laws. And we certainly cannot have them getting any ideas about booking flights to other countries...
I've pretty much given up hope for the American people ever growing a spine and standing up for themselves, but if there's one thing I still believe can make things start happening it's if gay marriage is outlawed.
Though I will prepare myself to be proven wrong. That hasn't failed me before.
It'll go the same way it went for abortion. Red states will get worse while blue states stay more or less the same, which will prevent libs in the blue areas from mobilizing effectively to protect minorities in the red ones.
This, Roe V. Wade was the ultimate test, it was repealed and America went "Oh no.... So anyway"
Edit: Which means they failed
I think at this point, organization efforts should be focused on evacuation and relocation of people from red states to blue states. Let the people who voted for this shit face all the inevitable consequences, and get the people who will most be in danger when Balkanization happens somewhere safe. They're already killing trans people, it's just gonna get worse.
While I agree with this sentiment.
I'm hoping there's an actual change with a plan, not just 100 Luigi's for every 1 CEO
It's okay because uncommitted are patting themselves on the back.
In fact they'd probably go, "Harris would've done the same thing!" lmao.
I'm still seeing them saying it here on Lemmy, in fact. Still blaming the Democratic Party for things and choices that they themselves chose to make.
And all because the Democratic Party did not give them a perfectly pretty, pretty pony.
Unfortunately uncommitted voters would not have changed the results pretty much at all. The representation in the voting population is a highly significant percent of the population as far as statistics are concerned.
If there was 100% voting then statistically they results would be identical to the point of no changes considering the sample size of people who did actually vote versus the whole population.
Wrong, just wrong.
36% of eligible voters did not vote. That's more people than voted for Trump.
Well sure but there are many niche groups who when aggregated together could've put us over the top. I just have to highlight this particularly group that so clearly shot themselves in the foot and should, ostensibly, know better. Trump supporters I can even understand more.
The taliban isn't welcome anywhere, even if they're white.
I've seen way too many lifted trucks with silkscreened AR-15 pattern rifles in the shape of a cross to believe this for one second.
Anybody have any idea what'll happen to those of us already gay married?
Well with this administration, reprogramming camps, a.k.a. forces labor camps are on the table. So is deportation, erasure, and ''where did they go? I have no idea what you mean? Who could possibly say? They just disappeared I guess!''
Initially just the rights gained by it removed. Any tax benefits, recognition of dependent status, military spouse stuff etc etc.
Later a list will be created and distributed.
The public will be encouraged to refuse service to openly gay people. From there it's a quick ride to imprisonment and reeducation until it's similar to Saudi Arabia. Then who knows.
Later a list will be created and distributed.
I have a gay friend who's in a long term relationship but not married. Given when he and his guy got together, I half expect the reason is worries that having his orientation be a matter of public record might become a serious liability in a potential future that is reasonably likely.
doesnt SA, also expel gay people and "denounce thier citizenship"
probably trying to abolish the right to marry same sex, or illegitimize the married already?
You might want to seriously consider moving to a country less hostile towards gay people.
if only were that easy, most wont give you a citizenship fast tracked , if your not in category like: being a SCIENTIST in a in demand field, or uncommon specialty in a MD.
or the other somewhat easier, is marrying someone in one of those countries, asap.
Log Cabin Republicans:
surprised_pikachu.jpg
any lgbtq+ and soon to be interracial ones too.
The American people are going to skin them alive and redistribute the wealth of their doners.
"Just a matter of when"
I've spent a lot of time about thermite catapults that retract into a small bed pickup topper.
They can't handle "just a matter of men".
State's rights means that if they can take away slavery then we can take away gay marriage.
Capitalism is slavery so america runs on slavery.
wow! What a rollercoaster ride
The stun lock proceeds
Marriage is a religious ceremony. The state should have nothing to do with it. This is the problem with mixing the state religion with theistic religion. Fuck the social and monetary benefits bestowed on those who participate. This kind of religious bullshit should be entirely removed from the state's system of violent coercion.
Marriage is a contract, not a religious ceremony. Being married carries a ton of legal benefits and rights that most people aren't even aware of.
There's a reason you have to see a judge and not a priest to get divorced.
Fuck off. My marriage happened in a judge's chambers without the slightest whiff of religion, as we're both atheist.
...yeah this isn't happening. Cry all you want, that shits in the constitution.
I saw that episode the other week. Don't know when it came out, but very accurate.
Oh to be so young that you don’t remember gay marriage being illegal
The US Constitution? It most certainly is not
In order for the Constitution to be meaningful it must be enforced. Who will enforce it if the two other branches of government don’t?
The SCROTUS already has ignored black letter law in the 14th amendment referring to participants in an insurrection.
Lol
Have you learned nothing? If these morons don’t like it, it’s going.
Dude, they want to decree all gays as pedos and give them the death penalty.
And you're going, "they can't do that! That's illegal!
Seriously?
Even the most devout cultists understand that culling 7% (and rising) of the population in a country with a negative birth rate is a bad move.
EDIT: I must admit, this reply has been living in my head rent free, and I have a lot more to say about it:
Are you aware of how much the death penalty costs? It is on average $3,000,000 for the state to execute someone (legally). Assume for a second you are a billionaire oligarch. You've cut taxes for you and your billionaire friends and raised them for the working class. Now assume you have 7.1% of the population that earns a roughly 10% higher wage on average (please note that although the median household income is lower than average for lesbian couples, both women do still make roughly 7% more than heterosexual women, as the gay wage gap exceeds the gender wage gap)
Now, although this percentage of he population produce more income, they are still firmly generally working class. So what do you do? Obviously you'd try to make it so they can't marry so you can collect more from them in taxes; you wouldn't fucking spend your tax dollars to murder them, that makes no sense.
They're evil, they aren't stupid.
Have you read the constitution?
Have you?
Relevant excerpt: "...No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;... nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
The amendment was not properly interpreted prior to 2015. It would be nearly impossible to change the interpretation at this point because it would need to be changes from "...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws" to "...nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of laws; except for gay people"
The 14th amendment should have covered gay marriage from the get-go; and I seriously don't see how you could argue that it can be restored to its prior; clearly wrong, interperitation.
There is nothing to overturn. This is not the same thing as Roe V Wade; which arguably did not have constitutional precident. Its clearly written in the 14th that Americans are to have equal rights legally. 'Less there's a fucking coup, that's not changing.