House passes bill to codify marriage equality with large bipartisan support
axios.com
axios.com
His views were always much more nuanced than what I’ve heard from most republicans even today. He didn’t support gay marriage but did support civil unions and other civil rights protections.
https://time.com/3816952/obama-gay-lesbian-transgender-lgbt-...
Although they always talk about "less government interference" and freedom and rights, they consistently vote to strip already established rights and freedoms away from people.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer would not say Tuesday if there would be a floor vote but said, “we’re going to look at everything we can do.”
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2022/07/19/dozens-of-repub...
An update from last night: in addition to Susan Collins as a primary sponsor to the Senate bill, Sen. Rob Portman from Ohio is also now signing on as a cosponsor.
https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/politics/ohio-politics/u...
Majority Leader Schumer has said he wants to bring it to the floor, but is working to assure that the Republican votes for it to pass (cloture, which takes 60 votes, more than the floor) are there first (that's been Schumer's MO on most things—if it's going to just get blocked by filibuster, he won't bring it up.)
I don't know how accurately he's reflecting his own position, but here's Rep. Jim Jordan saying that he feels this is the Democrats attempting to "delegitimize and attempt to intimidate the United States Supreme Court," and that the bill is "unnecessary"
Supreme Court: rules marriage equality is constitutional
Bigots: damned activist judges shouldn't legislate from the bench
Congress: legislates marriage equality
Bigots: damned activist legislature shouldn't legislate its concurrence with the courts!
I guess pandering to the lowest common denominator gets you votes.
My representative voted "no", and I guarantee my friends and family won't forget it.
The lack of uniformity would be a mess, though, so Congress should pass a constitutional amendment. It looks like they might have the votes.
But as far as a gay-marriage-amendment, i'm against. I just don't think its up to the gov at all to dictate who can be married. Just honor the damn marriage contracts like you do all other contracts.
But the only way that government would honor all marriage contracts equally, treating them like any other contract, is through a Constitutional amendment declaring gay marriage equal to straight marriage. It only existed to begin with because it was implied to be a Constitutionally protected right.
Because the timeline we actually live in is the one in which the government already dictates who can't be married, precisely because the Constitution no longer forbids them from doing so.
But that's the world we live in apparently.
Don't let perfection be the enemy of progress.
I'm glad your friends and family won't forget it, but neither will his other constituents. They'll turn out in droves to support him, and will almost certainly return him to office.
I don't know who your representative is, so maybe you're in one of those few knife-edge districts. But right now it looks as if Republicans are going to overwhelm the House and Senate, if only because people almost always vote against the party in the White House, even when there isn't a recession going on.
Maybe after this system is thrown out, one way or another, we'll replace it with a system less prone to tyrannies of the majority (or tyrannies of the minority with thumbs on the electoral scale). Perhaps proportional representation, or list voting.
But I think that the present system is now permanently captured and there's not much you can do about it. If you disagree (and for your sanity, you should), you can go ahead and try to communicate your feelings to your representative. I'm just going to complain about it.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-bill/29/...