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.
I didn’t read your whole comment. I got to the point where you said you don’t want to see adoption end entirely.
And what I want you to understand, is the language in project 2025 is about ending adoption entirely for queer families.
So yes, when you come in to a thread about queer erasure, with concern trolling about women, yeah it’s going to feel like propaganda. And I had to go through your comments to be sure you weren’t a bot.
Because not all adoptions are wrong. To use your painted dog argument, yes some adoption agencies are predatory. Yes capitalism is predatory and it puts women in a shitty position when it comes to adoption. But that doesn’t make all adoptions evil.
Like if me and my partner wanted to be surrogates for a couple that couldn’t have babies, illegal.
That’s some authoritarian bullshit.
And I don’t know where you fall on the left spectrum but I’m a fucking anarchist. I don’t need authoritarians telling me my partner and I can’t carry children for our friends. Fuck that.
So yeah, adoption is way more nuanced than you are making it out. And in your defense of women, you defended queer erasure.
And then played your gay card to justify your shitty take. While throwing queer families under the bus.
For the umpteenth time: I don’t support project 2025! Why would you even think that? I do think adoption in some cases is okay. Being queer has nothing to do with whether or not adoption is okay. Project 2025 has nothing to do with my feelings about adoption. I have mixed feelings about surrogacy, but if it’s for friends I believe it’s okay. I’m not an anarchist anymore, I’m more authoritarian these days – after all, I do think there should be an authority stopping people from polluting the planet and coercing pregnant people into giving up their children.
Can you please remember the human and not assume that someone who disagrees with you is arguing in bad faith and is intentionally using evil tactics or a “concern trolling” bot?
I do not know how to be more clear about me not supporting project 2025, me supporting queer people, and me understanding that not all cases of adoption are the same. Like, I feel like almost every sentence I have said is about one of those things, in support of that thesis. It is as though you are imagining I have said things entirely the opposite of what I have said.
Because of context. Look at where we are having this conversation.
This is a thread that started in your response to my comment about queer erasure in the current administration. Which is running project 2025’s playbook I know adoption isn’t 100% good. It is nuanced though. And the intention of the language in project 2025 is to ban it, to hurt queer families. And a lot of other people will be hurt because of it too.
Again, context.
And I’m not against regulation. Don’t mistake being an anarchist for being a libertarian.
You’re right to swing your fist ends where it hits my face. And that goes basically for all property ownership, because it leads to climate change, pollution, extracting resources from the Earth and killing most of the life on this planet.
Accumulation of wealth is a type of authoritarianism too. Power and coercion over others. And I’m quite aware of how the current world order abuses wealth, and people’s lack of wealth, to do things like extract babies from poor countries.
And yes, I believe that sort of coercion should be stopped. And I believe the most skillful way to stop it is communism, and to end capitalism.
But that’s not what I was referring to when you came in with your whole argument against adoption.
I was referring to my god-given right to make a baby and give it to my friends and allow them to raise it.
If you think coercive of forms of adoption should be banned, I’m right there with you. But that wasn’t the conversation I was having when you walked in.
So again context.
If you care about queer people, quit distracting from the issues.
This is not a distraction; this is in my mind a serious issue of similar weight to queer rights. I think there are a similar number of people who have been coerced into giving up a child for adoption as there are queer people, within an order of magnitude at least. It’s like you’re saying “stop whining about class warfare, it’s distracting from queer rights.”
If the context of the post this is under is distracting you from the issue of adoption rights, feel free to start a thread in another post and ping me. My point was not a top-level comment though.