Respect for Marriage Act

[Bludogdem]

Marriage equality bill clears key hurdle in Senate

“ The Respect for Marriage Act, a bill to codify protections for same-sex and interracial marriage, on Wednesday cleared a major procedural hurdle in the Senate after garnering enough support from Senate Republicans.”


https://www.axios.com/2022/11/16/respec ... enate-vote

Things are definitely looking up.

[gounion]

Marriage equality bill clears key hurdle in Senate

“ The Respect for Marriage Act, a bill to codify protections for same-sex and interracial marriage, on Wednesday cleared a major procedural hurdle in the Senate after garnering enough support from Senate Republicans.”


https://www.axios.com/2022/11/16/respec ... enate-vote

Things are definitely looking up.

Don’t pretend you support this.

[Glennfs]

Don’t pretend you support this.

How do you know he doesn't. I know I support it and I am guessing Memphis supports it.
Even in areas where we have agreement you folks on the left look for division. I suppose it has to do with the fact that we on the right are far more openmined than you on the left.
Who collectively support not even one conservative position and proud of it.

[Bludogdem]

How do you know he doesn't. I know I support it and I am guessing Memphis supports it.
Even in areas where we have agreement you folks on the left look for division. I suppose it has to do with the fact that we on the right are far more openmined than you on the left.
Who collectively support not even one conservative position and proud of it.

Over the last 25 years I’ve probably been to as many or more commitment ceremonies than traditional weddings. After Obergefell they became weddings.

[gounion]

How do you know he doesn't. I know I support it and I am guessing Memphis supports it.
Even in areas where we have agreement you folks on the left look for division. I suppose it has to do with the fact that we on the right are far more openmined than you on the left.
Who collectively support not even one conservative position and proud of it.

Because greengrass is a lying sock that makes everything up, and you know it.

And you all say you support it but you vote for those against it. Of your Congressman and two Senators, how many of them will vote for it?

[carmenjonze]

F. all of you dirty, dishonest cons.

The only read this kind of legislation is necessary is because of you.

I hope Congress does the same thing with interracial marriage and contraception.

[carmenjonze]

How do you know he doesn't. I know I support it and I am guessing Memphis supports it.
Even in areas where we have agreement you folks on the left look for division. I suppose it has to do with the fact that we on the right are far more openmined than you on the left.
Who collectively support not even one conservative position and proud of it.

Conservative positions are designed to create second-class citizens of minorities like LGBTQs and immigrants. There’s no reason to open ourselves up to more discrimination and more legislated hate, why should we.

You on the other had are so confused you actually defend your love for Ralph Norman and Lindsey Graham, two of the most anti-LGBTQ legislators in modern history.

Assholes like you and these other rightwing bigots around here are why this kind of law is needed and why civil rights movements are necessary, at all

Go shove your fake support. We do not need support from forced-childbirth supremacists.

[bird]

This is great. This is what would make it better. Completely remove clergy of any type from legalizing the marriage. Once a license is issued the couple is married. If a couple wishes to have a religious ceremony for whatever reason that would be fine. It would have no bearing on the legality of the marriage.

[gounion]

This is great. This is what would make it better. Completely remove clergy of any type from legalizing the marriage. Once a license is issued the couple is married. If a couple wishes to have a religious ceremony for whatever reason that would be fine. It would have no bearing on the legality of the marriage.

I understand that's how it's done in Europe. Marriage is a legal and financial contract. You get the license, you're married under the law. After that, get whatever ceremony you wish to have, or not.

[carmenjonze]

This is great. This is what would make it better. Completely remove clergy of any type from legalizing the marriage. Once a license is issued the couple is married. If a couple wishes to have a religious ceremony for whatever reason that would be fine. It would have no bearing on the legality of the marriage.

This seems to me like reinventing the wheel. Why would the country need to remove clergy from legitimating marriages?

[gounion]

This seems to me like reinventing the wheel. Why would the country need to remove clergy from legitimating marriages?

There's two parts to it: The legal part, the religious part. When you divorce, you have to do it in court, not with the clergy, as it involves dividing property and dealing with the children, if any.

So it's not re-inventing the wheel. Just make the license the legal marriage, signed by the clerk or whoever. Then, if they want to have a religious ceremony, fine. Or not, as we did in case of my wife and I.

[carmenjonze]

There's two parts to it: The legal part, the religious part. When you divorce, you have to do it in court, not with the clergy, as it involves dividing property and dealing with the children, if any.

So it's not re-inventing the wheel. Just make the license the legal marriage, signed by the clerk or whoever. Then, if they want to have a religious ceremony, fine. Or not, as we did in case of my wife and I.

But we already have that. Clergy is not necessary for marriage or divorce - you can just go down to City Hall and do it. I don’t see where barring clergy from the legality of a marriage/divorce aids samesex marriage?

[bird]

But we already have that. Clergy is not necessary for marriage or divorce - you can just go down to City Hall and do it. I don’t see where barring clergy from the legality of a marriage/divorce aids samesex marriage?

This derives from my being a strict separationist. No “by the power vested in me by the state of…”. No involvement of clergy whatsoever in the legitimization of marriage. A religious ceremony is fine with no basis in secular legality.

[Glennfs]

But we already have that. Clergy is not necessary for marriage or divorce - you can just go down to City Hall and do it. I don’t see where barring clergy from the legality of a marriage/divorce aids samesex marriage?

I was married by a judge at the courthouse back in 1980. IMO judges should be required to perform any legal marriage ceremony.
However when it comes to churches their doctrine should be the deciding factor.
Personally I think big church weddings are bullshit and a huge waste of money

[gounion]

The clergy has been our problem all along, since they've fought it so long and hard.

My problem with this bill is it doesn't put Obergefell into law. It just says that all states must recognize marriages that were legally performed in other states. So, the Supreme Court could overturn Obergefell and we'd be back to many states refusing to marry gay people.

[gounion]

How do you know he doesn't. I know I support it and I am guessing Memphis supports it.
Even in areas where we have agreement you folks on the left look for division. I suppose it has to do with the fact that we on the right are far more openmined than you on the left.
Who collectively support not even one conservative position and proud of it.

Your Congressmen and BOTH Senators voted "NAY".

[Glennfs]

The clergy has been our problem all along, since they've fought it so long and hard.

My problem with this bill is it doesn't put Obergefell into law. It just says that all states must recognize marriages that were legally performed in other states. So, the Supreme Court could overturn Obergefell and we'd be back to many states refusing to marry gay people.

Probably left out on purpose so thet can still have a campaign issue

[carmenjonze]

However when it comes to churches their doctrine should be the deciding factor.

Their doctrine should be the deciding factor in what?

Personally I think big church weddings are bullshit and a huge waste of money

And?

[gounion]

Probably left out on purpose so thet can still have a campaign issue

No. Only way they can pass anything to protect the marriages already performed. The majority of your party wouldn't even agree to THAT. They want the Supreme Court to overturn all gay marriages.

[carmenjonze]

The clergy has been our problem all along, since they've fought it so long and hard.

If you’re talking about samesex marriage, that’s not exactly true. Opposition to samesex marriage has been both secular and conservative-religious.

Some of the largest liberal and mainline Protestant Christian denominations have bothe samesex marriage and clergy, as does Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist Judaism. And now maybe the LDS.

My problem with this bill is it doesn't put Obergefell into law. It just says that all states must recognize marriages that were legally performed in other states. So, the Supreme Court could overturn Obergefell and we'd be back to many states refusing to marry gay people.

Yes, many states never took their antigay laws off the books for this exact reason. Related to why they never took their anti-abort laws off the books.

Then they’ll te you, oh I support x because X is the law of the land.

Until it’s not. This is exactly what Glennfs and those people did with abortion.

[gounion]

If you’re talking about samesex marriage, that’s not exactly true. Opposition to samesex marriage has been both secular and conservative-religious.

Some of the largest liberal and mainline Protestant Christian denominations have bothe samesex marriage and clergy, as does Conservative, Reform, and Reconstructionist Judaism. And now maybe the LDS.



Yes, many states never took their antigay laws off the books for this exact reason. Related to why they never took their anti-abort laws off the books.

Then they’ll te you, oh I support x because X is the law of the land.

Until it’s not. This is exactly what Glennfs and those people did with abortion.

I stand corrected. While the clergy led the way, yes, homosexuality for decades was almost universally seen as a perversion, to be stomped out whenever found.

I think the turnaround on gay rights is exceptional in our history, I can't think of another issues where the majority of Americans switched so quickly. Of course, now we have the backlash of hatred from the right that is, since they lost that battle, are now going after the trans community, since they ALWAYS have to have someone to hate and attack.

[carmenjonze]

Probably left out on purpose so thet can still have a campaign issue

Spoken truly as a person whose marriage is not in danger of becoming illegal and never has been.

This is attitude that got you guys hammered in the midterms. You yourself even tried to claim abortion wasn’t one of the “real issues.” http://radiofreeliberal.com/viewtopic.p ... 450#p42450

[gounion]

Probably left out on purpose so thet can still have a campaign issue

Then why didn't Ralph Norman, Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott introduce a bill making Gay Marriage the law of the land?

Oh, right, they even voted "NAY" on this bill!

And Lindsey Graham is too busy introducing a bill to ban abortion nationwide, giving lie to the Big Lie of "State's Rights".

[carmenjonze]

I stand corrected. While the clergy led the way, yes, homosexuality for decades was almost universally seen as a perversion, to be stomped out whenever found.

I think the turnaround on gay rights is exceptional in our history, I can't think of another issues where the majority of Americans switched so quickly. Of course, now we have the backlash of hatred from the right that is, since they lost that battle, are now going after the trans community, since they ALWAYS have to have someone to hate and attack.

I don’t think it switched quickly, to be honest. LGBTQ rights was a major beneficiary of the Civil Rights movement’s winning strategies and tactics, and overtly utilized them. Plus, there’s a lot of folks like me who are the crossovers in both movements. So a lot of the groundwork was already laid.

I say this also having known several people in various Christian denominations deeply involved in the struggles to change their denominations’ anti-LGBTQ policies. One person I know’s own case took literally 20 years but was instrumental in reversing the Presbyterian Church USA’s policies. And this is just a faction of US Protestantism, though it’s a sizeable one.

There have been prominent clergy, including a ton of heterosexual clergy, who have been instrumental in forwarding LGBTQ, and marriage rights in particular.

All this to say that LGBTQ rights in this country started in earnest in the 50s and, you probably already know this, but one of the architects of the movement Harry Hay, was first inspired by the labor strike of 1934 in San Francisco. All this to say, it may appear that changes happened quickly but it’s been — and still is — a very long slog.

[gounion]

I don’t think it switched quickly, to be honest. I say this having known several people in various Christian denominations deeply involved in the struggles to change their denominations’ anti-LGBTQ policies. One person I know’s own case took literally 20 years but was instrumental in reversing the Presbyterian Church USA’s policies. And this is just a faction of US Protestantism, though it’s a sizeable one.

There have been prominent clergy, including a ton of heterosexual clergy, who have been instrumental in forwarding LGBTQ, and marriage rights in particular.

All this to say that LGBTQ rights in this country started in earnest in the 50s and, you probably already know this, but one of the architects of the movement Harry Hay, was first inspired by the labor strike of 1934 in San Francisco. All this to say, it may appear that changes happened quickly but it’s been — and still is — a very long slog.

Yes it was a long slog, but according to polling it switched quickly in the 2000’s to 2010’s. I think the big thing was when celebs then regular people started coming out, and people realized it was members of their own family were gay. I mean, when Dick Cheney’s daughter comes out gay, it can happen to anyone!

I think those with the courage to come out made all the difference.