
post
But Barrett has suggested recently that same-sex marriage might be in a different category than abortion because people have relied on the decision when they married and had children.
Or, you know, because people should be able to choose who they marry. Wait, that actually applies to deciding whether to have children too!
They are similar, but she has the logic backwards. People should be able to marry who they want and have abortions because people should be able to choose for themselves.
That aside, there are SO MANY RIGHTS that come with being married that you actively deny LGBTQ couples when you deny them marriage.
For example:
Did you know that in a court case, your spouse cannot be compelled to testify against you? Speech between spouses is protected at the same level as lawyer/client or priest/penitent.
I wonder if they used this logic, if people who wanted an abortion within the time frame of the ruling and finding out they were pregnant could sue.
Like - I had already conceived before your ruling on Roe vs Wade, so that decision was made based off existing laws, so I should have been allowed the abortion.
Sue for the entire cost of raising those children.
Fuck these uncaring pieces of shit.
If only there were no such thing as religion, same sex marriage probably wouldn't be as much of an issue or not even be an issue at all.
Or abortion, or feeding the hungry, or helping the homeless, or universal healthcare...
Many ancient cultures such as romans and greeks where very chill with gay people, hecj they had a lot of gay people, gay emperors and even a trans girl as emperor! Then christianity came in and...
Edut: i was wrong with Elegabus(the trans emperor)
To be fair, Elegabalus was distinctly Syrian in upbringing and religion, and his trans-ness was not accepted by the general Roman public at all. It was one of the main reasons his grandmother had him and his mother (her own daughter!) assassinated in order to crown his nephew Alexander the new emperor.
No offense but this is so oversimplified so as to be borderline lying. The other guy noted the whole Elegabulus thing but I will note that being a top was fine in Roman culture while being a bottom was a no no. It's to do with dominance and Roman gender norms, may I suggest the Sacred Band of Thebes instead since they were pretty chill with their gayness.
We must be living in a Scary Door episode where governments regulate entities which impact the few rather than those that impact the many.
Keep the government closed until it's gone for good. The US federal government is beyond worth saving. Let's start over
This is such a nonstarter, as Gorsuch was the one who wrote the opinion on Bostock. He's strong on LGBT rights. So there's a solid 5 with him, Kagan, Sotomayor, KBJ, and Roberts.
Don't worry. They will support the spirit of gay rights but will vote it down on a technicality they invent.
When you read the article, it’s just that there is an appeal that’s unlikely to get picked up. Headline seems a bit hysterical.
Yeah just like they weren't going to pick up Roe v Wade right?
They said that over and over too lol
“Roe v. Wade is not going to be overturned. We all know that.”
- Chris Collins, R - N.Y.
“I think the likelihood of Roe v. Wade being overturned is very minimal. I don’t see that happening, truly I don’t see that happening.”
- Joni Ernst, R - Iowa
“Well, I don’t think anybody is going to overturn Roe v. Wade … it’s a settled opinion … I doubt seriously that that’s really a legitimate concern.”
- Orrin Hatch, R - Utah
I could go on and on... Now they're saying the exact same things about same sex marriage
Fool me once, shame on... shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.
all 49 comments