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.

  • tree_frog@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    206
    ·
    16 days ago

    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.

      • solsangraal@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        109
        ·
        16 days ago

        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”

      • ubergeek@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        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.

  • ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    157
    ·
    15 days ago

    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.

    • Pacattack57@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      49
      ·
      15 days ago

      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.

      • baines@lemmy.cafe
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        14 days ago

        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

    • chiliedogg@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      15 days ago

      That’s a weird thing I’ve seen in my life. Of the 5 most loud, vocal Trump supporters I know, 3 are lesbians. It’s weird.

        • stardust@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          15 days ago

          Maybe what they all have in common is wanting to be the lone exception to all the suffering others of their kind will go through. Some sick joy found in being a lone survivor.

    • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      15 days ago

      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.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

    • OldChicoAle@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      15 days ago

      If they can’t be openly gay and comfortable in their own skin, no one can be. I fucking hate Republicans.

    • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

  • Rhoeri@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    ·
    15 days ago

    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.

    • Barbecue Cowboy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      15 days ago

      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.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days ago

      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…

  • lobut@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    76
    ·
    16 days ago

    So … when are they going back to legalising child marriage and removing divorce?

      • Mirshe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        41
        ·
        15 days ago

        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”.

        • reddig33@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          20
          ·
          15 days ago

          Lack of no fault also meant you often had to lie about your spouse in order to get a divorce. Sometimes these lies were agreed to by the spouses beforehand, sometimes they were not.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      15 days ago

      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.

    • ubergeek@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

  • FosterMolasses@leminal.space
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    66
    ·
    14 days 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.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      14 days 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.

      • Ledericas@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        14 days ago

        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.

    • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days 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@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        14 days 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?

        • HelixDab2@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 days 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…?

    • smeenz@lemmy.nz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      14 days ago

      Don’t forget separate areas on the bus and theatre for coloured folk. Gotta regress fully.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      15 days ago

      While Libertarians spread the “both sides” false equivalency and mark ‘R’ on their ballots…

  • Sanctus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    52
    ·
    edit-2
    16 days ago

    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.

    • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      14 days ago

      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.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        14 days ago

        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.

  • PugJesus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    16 days ago

    “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

  • Hobbes_Dent@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    16 days ago

    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.