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.
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.
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.
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.
The leader of Germany’s Neo Nazi Party is a woman dating an immigrant woman. I don’t fuckin get it
Let me guess - TERF?
No, she hates black people. Like REALLY hates black people.
Ahhhh yeah that tracks
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.
And then they will come after them for back taxes or something.
She’ll just blame Democrats and the left, somehow.
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.
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.
Yep. They didn’t give a flying fuck about public sentiment on the right to abortion, either.
“Liberty Council” seems to take away liberties. Yup. That sounds like conservatives all right.
Very “Ministry of Truth” of them.
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.
Imagine being so gay that you sit around thinking about gay sex.
I don’t have to imagine it
What office are you going to run for?
I dunno something gay
Office of missionary for the sole purpose of procreation probably
Chairman of the Federal Department of Cum Guzzling
So, Focus on the Family?
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.
GOP delenda est.
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.
I’m worried about Loving v. Virginia, at this point!
“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
I hate this country. My loving marriage has far more right to exist than these ghouls’
Just more government fingers in places they shouldn’t be from the party of supposedly small government.
Waaaahhh! Someone is different than me so they should be banned
🤣🤣🤣
It’s okay because uncommitted are patting themselves on the back.
In fact they’d probably go, “Harris would’ve done the same thing!” lmao.
I’m still seeing them saying it here on Lemmy, in fact. Still blaming the Democratic Party for things and choices that they themselves chose to make.
And all because the Democratic Party did not give them a perfectly pretty, pretty pony.
Unfortunately uncommitted voters would not have changed the results pretty much at all. The representation in the voting population is a highly significant percent of the population as far as statistics are concerned.
If there was 100% voting then statistically they results would be identical to the point of no changes considering the sample size of people who did actually vote versus the whole population.
Wrong, just wrong.
36% of eligible voters did not vote. That’s more people than voted for Trump.
I don’t think you understood my point when it comes to statistics and significance. I wasn’t talking about how many people didn’t vote, I was talking about how the people who did vote is a monumental sample size for the entire population. So if the entire population did vote the outcome would be very similar to what the sample size predicted with their actual votes.
Still mathematically incorrect, I’m afraid.
Your point isn’t valid because “people who voted” is certainly not a random sample but it is also not an unbiased or stratified sample of the population.
It’s very plausible indeed that (for example) democratic leaning voters were jaded and stayed home whilst republicans were excited about the disruptive influence their guy mightt have.
Your sample contains no eligible voters whatsoever in the stayed-home category and it’s heinous extrapolation to assume that your proportion extends into this group with markedly different behaviour to those in your sample, especially when the percentages were so close in any case.
Using your logic, I could do a hypothesis test with a tiny sample of hundred voters and get my margin of error under a SL of 5% and claim statistical significance, because if I excluded people who voted in person or people who voted by postal vote, I would get strikingly different outcomes. Thus, if voter preference is correlated so markedly even by method of voting, it’s absurd to suggest that there’s no correlation over fact of voting.
By your logic (statistical significance irrespective of how non-random and non-stratified a sample is), no pre election poll could ever be wrong.
Statistical significance isn’t the same as truth. How representive and free from bias your sample is are two things that are critical to the validity of your conclusions.
Well sure but there are many niche groups who when aggregated together could’ve put us over the top. I just have to highlight this particularly group that so clearly shot themselves in the foot and should, ostensibly, know better. Trump supporters I can even understand more.
Yeah because it matters who you marry.
No tax breaks for the gays*
*unless they’re billionaires
It’s much worse than that. Jim Obergefell’s case was based on him not being allowed to see his dying husband. If anything happens to me and I’m seriously injured Obergefell v Hodges means my wife will be called and allowed to make medical and mortuary decisions for me instead of those responsibilities falling on the father who hasn’t spoken to me since I came out of the closet a decade ago.
The taliban isn’t welcome anywhere, even if they’re white.
I’ve seen way too many lifted trucks with silkscreened AR-15 pattern rifles in the shape of a cross to believe this for one second.
If they aren’t stopped, it’s only a matter of time before women won’t be able to own property, take loans or have credit in their names, and maybe even have bank accounts in their own name. Only men will be able to file for divorce. etc, etc.
Right. Any kind of fiscal autonomy means any uppity women are a flight risk and they need to be brought to heel and kept within states that enact the most draconian laws. And we certainly cannot have them getting any ideas about booking flights to other countries…
