[ClearCase_guy]

Gosh. I wonder if Mitt Romney is interested in that polygamy thing.

[JudyinCanada]

This was predicted a looooong time ago. Move away from the standard (God’s standard) and anything goes. Anything.

[combat_boots]

Islam

[Lockbox]

Can I enter my 14 wife’s on my IRS tax return? We all plan to file a tax return claiming the spouses to maximize deductions... 🤣

[joshua c]

please correct me if i am wrong

but wont this cause the matter to get before the supreme court

and since it used the same logic as roe v wade would be kicked to the states

it does not matter what congress does if ussc rules it is a state matter

[BenLurkin]

Respect for Marriage Act (Orwellian name) would force every state to recognize any “marriage” of any other state “between 2 individuals.”

Why only two? Serious question.

As the Senate makes a mockery of marriage then why not go just a little further and endorse polygamy?

[TexasFreeper2009]

LMAO

ZERO chance they find 10!!!! Republicans to vote for that

[deport]

Two men marry, surrounded by wedding party, in New Orleans, LA on November 11, 2017

The United States Census Bureau has collected data on unmarried same-sex households since 2005. Since 2013 following United States v. Windsor, the Bureau began recording married same-sex households in its Same-Sex Couples report. It recorded about 252,000 same-sex spouses in 2013; 335,000 in 2014; 425,000 in 2015; 487,000 in 2016; 555,000 in 2017; 593,000 in 2018. In 2018, the states of California, Texas and New York had the highest total number of same-sex households, whereas Wyoming, Vermont, South Dakota and Connecticut had the most married same-sex households in comparison to unmarried households (92.4% of Wyoming same-sex households were married, followed by Vermont at 79.3%, South Dakota at 77.8% and Connecticut at 70.7%). Nationally, 59.5% of cohabiting same-sex couples were married.[178] The Population Reference Bureau reported that by October 2015 approximately 486,000 same-sex marriages had taken place in the United States. It estimated that 45% of all same-sex couples in the country were married at that time.[179] According to Gallup, the percent of cohabiting same-sex couples who are married rose from 38% in 2015 to 49% in 2016 and to 61% in 2017.[180]

Same-sex marriage in the United States

[Brooklyn Attitude]

“Democrats Plan Senate Vote on Radical Same-Sex ‘Marriage’ Bill by End of September”

What are the Republicans planning? Do they have a list of goals they want to accomplish? If so do they have a strategy on how to accomplish them? Doesn’t seem so.

[wiseprince]

It’s going to pass. Again, there is no opposition party

[quantim]

Why in Heaven’s sake would somebody want more than one mother-in-law?

[FlingWingFlyer]

DemocRATS are the greatest threat to democracy. They give democracy a bad name.

[wiseprince]

What if you don’t identify as an individual but you identify identify as a partnership? What if two women identify as one woman and decide to marry one man?

[Amendment10]

Thank you for referencing that article marshmallow. Please note that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

Regarding politically correct federal marriage bill, patriots are reminded that, just as the misguided Supreme Court has finally at least admitted that government power to legalize the murder of unborn children belongs to the states, it also remains that neither have the states expressly constitutionally given the feds the power to regulate marriage.

"From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited [emphasis added]." —United States v. Butler, 1936.

Not only do I still question if Supremes overturned Roe v. Wade to try to help alleged election-stealing Democrats win 2022 midterm elections, the marriage bill is undoubtedly an additional attempt by election year desperate Democrats and RINOs to exploit constitutionally low-information, post-17th Amendment ratification voters to try to stay in power imo.

Additionally, consider that activist Supreme Court justices are undoubtedly very much aware that, as a consequence of the very corrupt, constitutionally undefined political parties dividing the Senate vote basically 50/50, the Senate's 2/3 supermajority power to remove from office activist Supreme Court justices impeached by House is effectively nullified imo.

In other words, activist justices know that they have job security imo, the Constitution be damned.

[Falconspeed]

Democrats are simply passing a stupid law to blame others for not supporting their stupidity. “Look at him! He doesn’t support our stupid laws!!”

[aimhigh]

117th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 8404

_______________________________________________________________________

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

July 20, 2022

_______________________________________________________________________

AN ACT

To repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and ensure respect for State regulation of marriage, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``Respect for Marriage Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF SECTION ADDED TO TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE, BY SECTION 2 OF THE DEFENSE OF MARRIAGE ACT.

Section 1738C of title 28, United States Code, is repealed.

SEC. 3. FULL FAITH AND CREDIT GIVEN TO MARRIAGE EQUALITY. Chapter 115 of title 28, United States Code, as amended by this Act, is further amended by inserting after section 1738B the following:
``Sec. 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof
``(a) In General.--No person acting under color of State law may deny--
``(1) full faith and credit to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State pertaining to a marriage between 2 individuals, on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals; or
``(2) a right or claim arising from such a marriage on the basis that such marriage would not be recognized under the law of that State on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals.
``(b) Enforcement by Attorney General.--The Attorney General may bring a civil action in the appropriate United States district court against any person who violates subsection (a) for declaratory and injunctive relief.
``(c) Private Right of Action.--Any person who is harmed by a violation of subsection (a) may bring a civil action in the appropriate United States district court against the person who violated such subsection for declaratory and injunctive relief.
``(d) State Defined.--In this section, the term `State' has the meaning given such term under section 7 of title 1.''.

SEC. 4. MARRIAGE RECOGNITION.

Section 7 of title 1, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``Sec. 7. Marriage
``(a) For the purposes of any Federal law, rule, or regulation in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual's marriage is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State.
``(b) In this section, the term `State' means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any other territory or possession of the United States.
``(c) For purposes of subsection (a), in determining whether a marriage is valid in a State or the place where entered into, if outside of any State, only the law of the jurisdiction applicable at the time the marriage was entered into may be considered.''.

SEC. 5. SEVERABILITY.

If any provision of this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, or the application of such provision to any person, entity, government, or circumstance, is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, or any amendment made thereby, or the application of such provision to all other persons, entities, governments, or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby.

[GOPJ]

Shaking the Gay money tree for donations and voters...

[NKP_Vet]

Sell-out republicans will make certain queer “marriage” is codified into law. They are scared to death they might lose a vote from the “independents” if they don’t. This country lost its moral compass years ago. Th United States is a God-less nation and has been for years.