kadee79
Senior Associate
S.W. Ga., zone 8b, out in the boonies!
Joined: Mar 30, 2011 15:12:55 GMT -5
Posts: 10,794
|
Post by kadee79 on Mar 13, 2023 17:37:24 GMT -5
|
|
dondub
Senior Associate
The meek shall indeed inherit the earth but only after the Visigoths are done with it.
Joined: Jan 16, 2014 19:31:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,110
Location: Seattle
Favorite Drink: Laphroig
|
Post by dondub on Mar 13, 2023 18:15:11 GMT -5
They must all be Pro-Life!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,124
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 13, 2023 18:30:27 GMT -5
After she spoke, the 21 S.C. GOPers patted U.S. GOP House Rep. Nancy Mace on her head.
|
|
busymom
Distinguished Associate
Why is the rum always gone? Oh...that's why.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 28,217
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://cdn.nickpic.host/images/IPauJ5.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0D317F
Mini-Profile Text Color: 0D317F
|
Post by busymom on Mar 13, 2023 19:09:45 GMT -5
So what happens to rapists? Can I push through a bill that requires the death penalty for all rapists, with no exceptions? (Daddy's money won't help.)
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,106
|
Post by tallguy on Mar 13, 2023 19:32:53 GMT -5
I'd rather push through a bill that requires the death penalty for any legislator who votes to limit, infringe, or deny the human or civil rights of another person.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,386
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 13, 2023 19:34:23 GMT -5
I'd rather push through a bill that requires the death penalty for any legislator who votes to limit, infringe, or deny the human or civil rights of another person. if only...
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Mar 13, 2023 19:53:46 GMT -5
I love this peek into the future of the bullshit cases that are going to clog the legal system for the next several decades.
It's only a matter of time before one of these patently ridiculously laws actually gets put on the books. Instead of making progress as a country, we are going to send ourselves back to the 19th century and waste so much time clawing ourselves back to where we were a few years ago.
|
|
NastyWoman
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 20:50:37 GMT -5
Posts: 14,233
Member is Online
|
Post by NastyWoman on Mar 13, 2023 20:27:18 GMT -5
Good thing the Loser fought so hard to keep all the Muslims out if the country. Surely we would have fallen under Sharia laws by now without his "valiant" efforts.
Now we can at least make sure that we have nice, clean, Christian laws lime the FF would have wanted. Never mind they had this hangup about state/religion separation. They really wanted it to be like this. Next up slavery: first women become property of their men again and after that the sky is the limit
What a vile excuse for human beings these representatives are. Note that I edited this last sentence before even posting to remove the reference that they are "so-called" representatives. There is nothing so-called about them. Voters have actually elected them which says something/a lot about them as well.
|
|
countrygirl2
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 7, 2016 15:45:05 GMT -5
Posts: 16,709
|
Post by countrygirl2 on Mar 13, 2023 21:16:36 GMT -5
Sometimes when people get what they think they wanted, they are desperately sorry about it.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,124
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 13, 2023 22:35:46 GMT -5
Some red states want to execute a woman who gets an abortion but other red states only want to punish the doctor but not charge the woman who received the abortion.
Meanwhile some states state it is no one's business and stay out of physician and patient's lives.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,327
|
Post by thyme4change on Mar 13, 2023 22:44:13 GMT -5
I love this peak into the future of the bullshit cases that are going to clog the legal system for the next several decades. I keep wondering what the end game is here. I refuse to believe that all these GOP politicians want their mistresses and daughters facing the death penalty. I am wondering if they are trying to create new crimes to try poor people, keeping the criminal courts so clogged that white collar crime will continue to go unnoticed. What money is supporting these - yes, Christian organizations, but aren’t rich people, businesses, lobby groups and corporations involved? Is this what they want politicians spending their time on? Why? Creating new poor workers? Putting more people in prison that they can treat as slave labor? Building and running more privatized prisons? I would feel better if I truly believed that all the people, power and money really thinks the loss of a fertilized egg is equal to the loss of a fully functioning human- but I don’t buy that for a single second.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 20,778
Member is Online
|
Post by happyhoix on Mar 14, 2023 6:59:04 GMT -5
I love this peak into the future of the bullshit cases that are going to clog the legal system for the next several decades. I keep wondering what the end game is here. I refuse to believe that all these GOP politicians want their mistresses and daughters facing the death penalty. I am wondering if they are trying to create new crimes to try poor people, keeping the criminal courts so clogged that white collar crime will continue to go unnoticed. What money is supporting these - yes, Christian organizations, but aren’t rich people, businesses, lobby groups and corporations involved? Is this what they want politicians spending their time on? Why? Creating new poor workers? Putting more people in prison that they can treat as slave labor? Building and running more privatized prisons? I would feel better if I truly believed that all the people, power and money really thinks the loss of a fertilized egg is equal to the loss of a fully functioning human- but I don’t buy that for a single second. It’s the GOP cynically appealing to voters. Where I live, in a bright red rural area, most GOP voters are single issue voters. They won’t vote for a Dem at all, because all Dems are ‘baby killers.’ GOP has spent the last decade persuading these voters that the GOP is the righteous party. Now that they can write laws against abortion access, they are going to far right extremes to prove they are the best GOP candidate in a field crammed with GOP candidates. As for their wives and daughters, they can always send them out of state or even out of the country to get the healthcare they need. Very cynical ploy.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Mar 14, 2023 8:29:21 GMT -5
That, and it allows them to distract from what they are really doing, which is consolidating massive amounts of wealth. It's the opposite of bread and circuses. Instead of feeding and entertaining us to distract from what they are doing, they have decided to throw us in a pit and watch us fight. Bonus, we will be so exhausted fighting for the same basic human rights, again, and again, and again, they can carry out their real work more or less unbothered.
It may be cynical, but it is also quite effective.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 14, 2023 10:38:10 GMT -5
Good thing the Loser fought so hard to keep all the Muslims out if the country. Surely we would have fallen under Sharia laws by now without his "valiant" efforts. Now we can at least make sure that we have nice, clean, Christian laws lime the FF would have wanted. Never mind they had this hangup about state/religion separation. They really wanted it to be like this. Next up slavery: first women become property of their men again and after that the sky is the limit What a vile excuse for human beings these representatives are. Note that I edited this last sentence before even posting to remove the reference that they are "so-called" representatives. There is nothing so-called about them. Voters have actually elected them which says something/a lot about them as well. yeah, i guess it was jealousy that motivated them, not any sense of justice.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 14, 2023 10:39:10 GMT -5
Some red states want to execute a woman who gets an abortion but other red states only want to punish the doctor but not charge the woman who received the abortion. Meanwhile some states state it is no one's business and stay out of physician and patient's lives. federal laws on this subject are a good thing.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 14, 2023 10:40:06 GMT -5
I love this peak into the future of the bullshit cases that are going to clog the legal system for the next several decades. I keep wondering what the end game is here. I refuse to believe that all these GOP politicians want their mistresses and daughters facing the death penalty. I am wondering if they are trying to create new crimes to try poor people, keeping the criminal courts so clogged that white collar crime will continue to go unnoticed. What money is supporting these - yes, Christian organizations, but aren’t rich people, businesses, lobby groups and corporations involved? Is this what they want politicians spending their time on? Why? Creating new poor workers? Putting more people in prison that they can treat as slave labor? Building and running more privatized prisons? I would feel better if I truly believed that all the people, power and money really thinks the loss of a fertilized egg is equal to the loss of a fully functioning human- but I don’t buy that for a single second. well, they know the laws don't apply to them or their daughters. does that reshape your argument?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 74,870
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Mar 14, 2023 10:40:48 GMT -5
That, and it allows them to distract from what they are really doing, which is consolidating massive amounts of wealth. It's the opposite of bread and circuses. Instead of feeding and entertaining us to distract from what they are doing, they have decided to throw us in a pit and watch us fight. Bonus, we will be so exhausted fighting for the same basic human rights, again, and again, and again, they can carry out their real work more or less unbothered. It may be cynical, but it is also quite effective. sure. it also keeps us divided when we could be working together to stop that.
|
|
countrygirl2
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 7, 2016 15:45:05 GMT -5
Posts: 16,709
|
Post by countrygirl2 on Mar 14, 2023 13:28:07 GMT -5
Some rich guys may really not care if their wives or daughters die, because they are true christians. Look at some of the horrible sharia laws.
I worry that the supreme court won't help for decades as it is now. I think they will uphold any of these far right laws, and many churches will uphold it.
It will take a congress with the house and senate and executive branch all dems before it will be righted. It will eventually happen but after how much horror?
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Mar 14, 2023 13:37:24 GMT -5
I have zero faith SCOTUS will prevail on the side of sanity. They have shown their hand, and we can expect no help from them. The bigger danger is the further erosion of civil rights across the board.
I have little doubt that Obergefell is next.
It's going to be a grim couple of decades, and any progress made is going to be eroded.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,386
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 14, 2023 15:46:58 GMT -5
I have zero faith SCOTUS will prevail on the side of sanity. They have shown their hand, and we can expect no help from them. The bigger danger is the further erosion of civil rights across the board. I have little doubt that Obergefell is next. It's going to be a grim couple of decades, and any progress made is going to be eroded. I can't this, as much as I agree with you. there is nothing positive about your post, and I'm not sure whether I'm more sad or disgusted. b/c honestly, we the people allowed this to happen. I intend to fight until/if it's clear we've lost, and in that case, I'm safe from the bullshit b/c I have another option. as much as I love Canada, this is my home and I don't relish the idea of leaving unless absolutely necessary. I have zero intention of being cast as a "Martha" in my lifetime.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,124
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 14, 2023 17:18:23 GMT -5
I have zero faith SCOTUS will prevail on the side of sanity. They have shown their hand, and we can expect no help from them. The bigger danger is the further erosion of civil rights across the board. I have little doubt that Obergefell is next. It's going to be a grim couple of decades, and any progress made is going to be eroded. Tennessee is trying its best to make that happen. Article dated March 9, 2023. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesThe bill is a direct challenge to federal marriage equality protections The Republican-controlled Tennessee state House of Representatives voted on Monday to pass a bill that would allow county officials to deny same-sex or interracial couples marriage licenses. House Bill 878 states that county clerks and their staff "shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person's conscience or religious beliefs." The bill now heads to the Senate, which will begin consideration of its passage in the chamber next week. If the bill becomes state law, it would directly challenge federal marriage equality protections, including Supreme Court rulings and the recently-passed Respect for Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act, which passed in the last congressional session and was signed into law by President Joe Biden, requires states to recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states but does not require them to issue same-sex marriage licenses themselves — meaning that if federal marriage equality protections are ever undone by the conservative-led Supreme Court, states would be able to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. Federal marriage equality protections have been in place since 2015, when the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that states must grant same-sex couples the right to marry. Decades earlier, in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia , the Court ruled that states could not ban interracial marriages. In the Supreme Court case upending abortion rights last summer, however, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested that justices should re-examine Obergefell and other cases based on "due process" precedents and the right to privacy standard previously established by the Court. The Tennessee bill, which has a high likelihood of passing, has the potential to upend marriage equality protections across the country — if the bill becomes law, it will likely be challenged, resulting in appeals that could work their way up to the Supreme Court. Critics condemned the bill for being a blatant attack on LGBTQ couples in the state, pointing out that the legislature has already passed a number of bills aimed at restricting the rights of LGBTQ people. "Extremist Tennessee lawmakers are unrelenting in their discriminatory attacks on the LGBTQ+ community," said Human Rights Campaign Legal Director Sarah Warbelow, adding that this bill and other anti-LGBTQ bills "are about stripping away the basic human rights that LGBTQ+ people have fought for over decades, forcing LGBTQ+ people, particularly transgender and non-binary people, back in the closet and labeling us as dangerous." "The Tennessee House of Representatives continues to be one of the most dangerous legislative chambers in the country for LGBTQ+ people," Tennessee Equality Project Executive Director Chris Sanders said. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couples
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,386
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 14, 2023 17:39:01 GMT -5
I have zero faith SCOTUS will prevail on the side of sanity. They have shown their hand, and we can expect no help from them. The bigger danger is the further erosion of civil rights across the board. I have little doubt that Obergefell is next. It's going to be a grim couple of decades, and any progress made is going to be eroded. Tennessee is trying its best to make that happen. Article dated March 9, 2023. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesThe bill is a direct challenge to federal marriage equality protections The Republican-controlled Tennessee state House of Representatives voted on Monday to pass a bill that would allow county officials to deny same-sex or interracial couples marriage licenses. House Bill 878 states that county clerks and their staff "shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person's conscience or religious beliefs." The bill now heads to the Senate, which will begin consideration of its passage in the chamber next week. If the bill becomes state law, it would directly challenge federal marriage equality protections, including Supreme Court rulings and the recently-passed Respect for Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act, which passed in the last congressional session and was signed into law by President Joe Biden, requires states to recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states but does not require them to issue same-sex marriage licenses themselves — meaning that if federal marriage equality protections are ever undone by the conservative-led Supreme Court, states would be able to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. Federal marriage equality protections have been in place since 2015, when the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that states must grant same-sex couples the right to marry. Decades earlier, in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia , the Court ruled that states could not ban interracial marriages. In the Supreme Court case upending abortion rights last summer, however, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested that justices should re-examine Obergefell and other cases based on "due process" precedents and the right to privacy standard previously established by the Court. The Tennessee bill, which has a high likelihood of passing, has the potential to upend marriage equality protections across the country — if the bill becomes law, it will likely be challenged, resulting in appeals that could work their way up to the Supreme Court. Critics condemned the bill for being a blatant attack on LGBTQ couples in the state, pointing out that the legislature has already passed a number of bills aimed at restricting the rights of LGBTQ people. "Extremist Tennessee lawmakers are unrelenting in their discriminatory attacks on the LGBTQ+ community," said Human Rights Campaign Legal Director Sarah Warbelow, adding that this bill and other anti-LGBTQ bills "are about stripping away the basic human rights that LGBTQ+ people have fought for over decades, forcing LGBTQ+ people, particularly transgender and non-binary people, back in the closet and labeling us as dangerous." "The Tennessee House of Representatives continues to be one of the most dangerous legislative chambers in the country for LGBTQ+ people," Tennessee Equality Project Executive Director Chris Sanders said. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesthis is just disgusting. ugh
|
|
Pink Cashmere
Senior Member
Joined: Sept 24, 2022 16:18:40 GMT -5
Posts: 4,337
|
Post by Pink Cashmere on Mar 14, 2023 18:10:29 GMT -5
As a Black woman living in the US, who has a Black male SO 🎯, a son 🎯 and a child that is gay 🎯, a Grandson🎯 and 2 Granddaughters 🎯🎯 that have to grow up and live in this country unless they figure out how to live their adult lives somewhere else, I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised that I seem to be losing my mind.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,592
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 14, 2023 18:15:46 GMT -5
So, if they don't like someone, and/or it's their Ex the state is going to stand behind whatever they decide?
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Mar 14, 2023 18:33:42 GMT -5
I have zero faith SCOTUS will prevail on the side of sanity. They have shown their hand, and we can expect no help from them. The bigger danger is the further erosion of civil rights across the board. I have little doubt that Obergefell is next. It's going to be a grim couple of decades, and any progress made is going to be eroded. Tennessee is trying its best to make that happen. Article dated March 9, 2023. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesThe bill is a direct challenge to federal marriage equality protections The Republican-controlled Tennessee state House of Representatives voted on Monday to pass a bill that would allow county officials to deny same-sex or interracial couples marriage licenses. House Bill 878 states that county clerks and their staff "shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person's conscience or religious beliefs." The bill now heads to the Senate, which will begin consideration of its passage in the chamber next week. If the bill becomes state law, it would directly challenge federal marriage equality protections, including Supreme Court rulings and the recently-passed Respect for Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act, which passed in the last congressional session and was signed into law by President Joe Biden, requires states to recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states but does not require them to issue same-sex marriage licenses themselves — meaning that if federal marriage equality protections are ever undone by the conservative-led Supreme Court, states would be able to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. Federal marriage equality protections have been in place since 2015, when the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that states must grant same-sex couples the right to marry. Decades earlier, in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia , the Court ruled that states could not ban interracial marriages. In the Supreme Court case upending abortion rights last summer, however, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested that justices should re-examine Obergefell and other cases based on "due process" precedents and the right to privacy standard previously established by the Court. The Tennessee bill, which has a high likelihood of passing, has the potential to upend marriage equality protections across the country — if the bill becomes law, it will likely be challenged, resulting in appeals that could work their way up to the Supreme Court. Critics condemned the bill for being a blatant attack on LGBTQ couples in the state, pointing out that the legislature has already passed a number of bills aimed at restricting the rights of LGBTQ people. "Extremist Tennessee lawmakers are unrelenting in their discriminatory attacks on the LGBTQ+ community," said Human Rights Campaign Legal Director Sarah Warbelow, adding that this bill and other anti-LGBTQ bills "are about stripping away the basic human rights that LGBTQ+ people have fought for over decades, forcing LGBTQ+ people, particularly transgender and non-binary people, back in the closet and labeling us as dangerous." "The Tennessee House of Representatives continues to be one of the most dangerous legislative chambers in the country for LGBTQ+ people," Tennessee Equality Project Executive Director Chris Sanders said. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesWas reading this article out of your state earlier today as well. They are just batting a thousand. www.propublica.org/article/tennessee-abortion-ban-doctors-ectopic-pregnancyI know no state is perfect, but it is why you would have blast me out of New England (except maybe NH/ME which always lag) with dynamite at this point.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,386
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 14, 2023 18:42:50 GMT -5
thank you for sharing that link, I have as well. I also couldn't finish reading it, as I wasn't sure if I would vomit or damage my company laptop. I can't fathom that this is the country in which I was born and raised.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Mar 14, 2023 18:47:29 GMT -5
It's just so much unnecessary pain and cruelty. While the woman featured didn't die, so many others aren't going to be so lucky.
While my sympathy was more heavily with the woman, it was clear the doctor also struggled with his decision. I would have to think like minded physicians are going to flee these states eventually. Who wants to live with that kind of cognitive dissonance if they don't have to. Which will just leave these states with medical systems even more unwilling to help their most in need patients.
It's barbaric.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,592
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Mar 14, 2023 18:51:58 GMT -5
That is one tough case/article. Good example too as why simple viability might be a boundary that is too early. Sounds like the financial, emotional and other struggles are far from over.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,124
|
Post by Tennesseer on Mar 14, 2023 19:09:32 GMT -5
Tennessee is trying its best to make that happen. Article dated March 9, 2023. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesThe bill is a direct challenge to federal marriage equality protections The Republican-controlled Tennessee state House of Representatives voted on Monday to pass a bill that would allow county officials to deny same-sex or interracial couples marriage licenses. House Bill 878 states that county clerks and their staff "shall not be required to solemnize a marriage if the person has an objection to solemnizing the marriage based on the person's conscience or religious beliefs." The bill now heads to the Senate, which will begin consideration of its passage in the chamber next week. If the bill becomes state law, it would directly challenge federal marriage equality protections, including Supreme Court rulings and the recently-passed Respect for Marriage Act. The Respect for Marriage Act, which passed in the last congressional session and was signed into law by President Joe Biden, requires states to recognize same-sex marriage licenses from other states but does not require them to issue same-sex marriage licenses themselves — meaning that if federal marriage equality protections are ever undone by the conservative-led Supreme Court, states would be able to deny same-sex couples the right to marry. Federal marriage equality protections have been in place since 2015, when the Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that states must grant same-sex couples the right to marry. Decades earlier, in the 1967 case Loving v. Virginia , the Court ruled that states could not ban interracial marriages. In the Supreme Court case upending abortion rights last summer, however, Justice Clarence Thomas suggested that justices should re-examine Obergefell and other cases based on "due process" precedents and the right to privacy standard previously established by the Court. The Tennessee bill, which has a high likelihood of passing, has the potential to upend marriage equality protections across the country — if the bill becomes law, it will likely be challenged, resulting in appeals that could work their way up to the Supreme Court. Critics condemned the bill for being a blatant attack on LGBTQ couples in the state, pointing out that the legislature has already passed a number of bills aimed at restricting the rights of LGBTQ people. "Extremist Tennessee lawmakers are unrelenting in their discriminatory attacks on the LGBTQ+ community," said Human Rights Campaign Legal Director Sarah Warbelow, adding that this bill and other anti-LGBTQ bills "are about stripping away the basic human rights that LGBTQ+ people have fought for over decades, forcing LGBTQ+ people, particularly transgender and non-binary people, back in the closet and labeling us as dangerous." "The Tennessee House of Representatives continues to be one of the most dangerous legislative chambers in the country for LGBTQ+ people," Tennessee Equality Project Executive Director Chris Sanders said. Tennessee Republicans pass bill letting clerks refuse marriage licenses to LGBTQ couplesWas reading this article out of your state earlier today as well. They are just batting a thousand. www.propublica.org/article/tennessee-abortion-ban-doctors-ectopic-pregnancyI know no state is perfect, but it is why you would have blast me out of New England (except maybe NH/ME which always lag) with dynamite at this point. I understand completely about New England. I was born and raised in Springfield, MA. Voted for Senator George McGovern in the '72 presidential election.
|
|
grumpyhermit
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jul 12, 2012 12:04:00 GMT -5
Posts: 1,432
|
Post by grumpyhermit on Mar 14, 2023 19:14:52 GMT -5
I drive through Springfield on my way to work, and curse that highway design every time.
But at least in MA and CT I am generally not worried about my basic rights being imperiled by the legislature.
|
|