this post was submitted on 23 Feb 2025
845 points (98.6% liked)

News

25333 readers
3697 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 38 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I hate this country. My loving marriage has far more right to exist than these ghouls'

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Agree entirely on the value judgement but it's not a right if a single party can remove it.

It should have been written into the damn constitution with an ammendment along with bodily autonomy for women. But that would have taken some guts and foresight by the democratic leaders.

Now it's too late.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It should have been written into the damn constitution with an ammendment along with bodily autonomy for women. But that would have taken some guts and foresight by the democratic leaders.

An amendment would have taken 38 state legislatures ratifying it. There aren't 38 state legislatures likely to pass ratification of an amendment that guarantees a right for any two adults to marry without exception and also guarantees a right for any woman to terminate any pregnancy without exception at her will.

That's probably tied for the lowest odds any hypothetical amendment has of being ratified.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Thankyou. I didn't realise quite how difficult it would have been.

So sad that things so obviously harmless and bettering for humanity can't get anywhere near that 76% support in the richest most privileged nation the world has ever seen.

Humanites high water mark is decidedly low considering the potential.

Oh well.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)