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.
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.
Fuck off. My marriage happened in a judge’s chambers without the slightest whiff of religion, as we’re both atheist.
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.
Marriage is not a “contract”. The legal benefits and rights that you mentioned aren’t possible with just a contract between the married couple.
…so what, you do the ceremony and God just says “Thou shall now file thy taxes together”?
My same-sex marriage ceremony occurred in a judge’s chambers, nothing religious whatsoever. My husband and I are both very much atheist and would not have allowed any religious bullshit in our marriage.
It’s more accurate to say that the IRS allows us to jointly file taxes once married. If we’re unmarried the IRS wouldn’t allow that. The benefit of filing jointly isn’t granted because of a “contract” between my husband and I, the benefit was already there and waiting for us to become eligible by getting married.
Ah, sincere apologies, I believe I mixed up who I was responding to.
No worries!
What the actual fuck are you talking about? The rights I mentioned aren’t possible just because a priest says so. The contract is what makes them possible.
I didn’t say anything about priests. No priest involved in my same-sex marriage. I’m not addressing religion at all here.
Legally, marriage is not simply a contract between the two married people.
For example, hospital visitation. If marriage is nothing more than a legal contract between my husband and I, how could it possibly compel a hospital to allow my husband to visit me if I’m hospitalized? The hospital didn’t agree to anything in our contract, so how else are they compelled?
My entire point is that marriage has legal benefits that go far beyond what a mere contract between two married parties can possibly grant.
The legal benefits are provided by the marriage contract. The papers you sign at the courthouse to declare you’re legally married are the contract.
How is a hospital legally bound by a contract, which they didn’t sign and doesn’t mention them, to allow my husband to visit me?
The answer is that they aren’t. They are bound by federal regulations to do so, not by the content of any marriage paperwork.
I think there may be some confusion in this thread between marriage contract and marriage license lol.