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.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    598 hours ago

    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.

    • OneMeaningManyNames
      link
      fedilink
      English
      167 hours ago

      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.

    • @CharlesDarwin
      link
      English
      7
      edit-2
      7 hours ago

      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.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      17 hours ago

      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.

      • Schadrach
        link
        fedilink
        English
        12 hours ago

        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?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          12 hours ago

          I couldn’t even make a semi-coherent claim as to how Alito, Thomas, Goresuch, Barret, and Kavanaugh (with Roberts tagging along) would toss that out, without also tossing out a ton of other stuff. Then again, Those six justices haven’t always been making coherent arguments for their ideologically-aligned decisions, so…?