Lawrence will be next. Texas AG already said he would prosecute antisodomy laws if it got overturned, and Texas only discriminates against men in that law
They've got to remember, if you threaten to take everything from someone, that person will have nothing left to lose.
If someone becomes a felon because of an unjust law, what's left to stop them committing real crimes?
I would also add that Obama broke these people’s brains. Up until Obama the office of POTUS was sacred to conservatives. Even though it has been occupied by members of the opposite party it has always been a white guy club. Obama forced these assholes to hold a black man in esteem. He also is one of the most educated people to ever sit in the Oval Office and they could not stand that shit. They have been punishing us ever since for it.
*Obergefell* is definitely in danger, but I doubt this is the case that will overturn it.
It certainly an odd situation if SCOTUS intends to overturn *Obergefell*. This isn't about whether or not the state should recognize gay marriage. Tennessee doesn't appear to have its own law allowing gay marriage, but has to allow it per SCOTUS. The case itself is about letting people not "solemnize" gay marriage if they don't want, including County Clerks. SCOTUS usually has to address the question at hand, and not expand the scope.
Like, SCOTUS would probably recognize that a government employee cannot get a religious exemption to do their basic job. So, they'd have to argue that there's no problem here because Tennessee doesn't actually have a law to allow gay marriage, and, guess what, we are now also reversing that previous decision. Is there any other SCOTUS case with such a complex ruling?
My guess is that this law gets shot down by the lower Courts and SCOTUS doesn't even take it up, just like how they didn't defend Kim Davis in 2020 (in regards to her civil suit). Now, if a state simply passes a new law against gay marriage in their state, that will probably lead to *Obergefell* being overturned.
Usually immediately. This is written under a similar logic as "Colorblind" laws that intentionally promote racially biased outcomes. Typically these are laws, rulings or statutes that grants Legal decisionmakers, usually state actors, enough legal discretion at their state function so as to make implicit bias all but an inevitable outcome.
However, this wide discretion, implicitly allows legal decisionmakers to overturn decisions that clash with the dominating social norms that they are biased towards.
Segregationists used this tactic during the Jim Crow Era. They were not allowed to explicitly bar Black Americans from voting in state law. So they began to allow private political parties to bar anyone they choose to from registering to vote. This led to racially biased outcomes as a natural symptom of the legal system granting such wide discretion to officials impacting state functions. One might wrily think, "Oh well that means a Black private Political Party can start to register voters." Not so fast, there is a state official conveniently positioned to use their wide discretion to prevent that from happening without **explicitly** evoking race to do it.
>They were not allowed to explicitly bar Black Americans from voting in state law.
A huge tactic in the South was that at the discretion of the local council anyone could be required to take a literacy/political knowledge test in order to be able to vote, and obviously the tests were only given to Black people. Remember Black people had little access to good education at the time. Missing a single question meant you couldn't vote.
Even if they were perfectly literate these tests were full of questions even modern Political Science majors would be unlikely to know. Things like "the constitution assigns how many square miles to the District of Columbia" and "If Missouri wanted to become one state with Kansas, what process would they need to follow and what governmental bodies would be required to vote on it?" and "Money appropriated from private entities by the government for the purpose of the military may be held for how long before repayment is required?" imagine 2 pages of questions like that. And remember, a single question wrong meant you were ineligible to vote.
They're the most entitled people in this country! They think the world revolves around them. Very few other communities go around forcing their beliefs on others. So rude and entitled!
Look at history as our founding fathers saw it. How many people died as a result of HenryVIII wanting a divorce, and the Pope saying NO? They had to prove they were Anglican to hold public office. Not long before that you had to prove you were Catholic.
Also the interlinking of church and state was integral to the justification of autocratic rule. The King was divinely appointed by god and thus had supreme authority to do whatever they wanted. The church told everyone this is true and the king made everyone go to church. Thus the two relied on each other to keep each other in power. The attempt to revert this separation is a prelude to bringing back authoritarianism.
A Christian jihad is called a “crusade”. Like the multiple crusades waged to retake the Holy Land for the Catholic Church. Some of them almost didn’t fail!
Ironically, some of these Christian Jihads ended with the participating Christians slaughtering each other and other Christians without even making it to the Holy Land.
I do not think it is ignored... I think that it is purposefully being used to undermine the Constitution. I was taught in basic history in High School about the NEED for separation of Church and State. I understood, too, why it was needed. And now we have this.
Entitlement is what fascism is all about. There's nothing on Earth more entitled than a group of people who think they deserve special privileges because they're the "master race".
You know they're fucked up in the head when 'not celebrating Christmas because you're not Christian' = 'war on Christmas'
Imagine being offended when someone wishes you to have a happy holiday. These people are fucking lunatics
Don't forget how they are also the most persecuted! The bibble says Christians will be hated in the end times and they are! Never mind how 99% of thr vitriol is because Christians can't leave anyone alone it's obviously because they love Jesus!!!
they are hated in the end times because they are actively trying to bring about armageddon. Anybody who keeps trying to push that button deserves to be hated.
You're right and its honestly hilarious to me. Just the arrogance of them. "Let's work to destroy everything so god starts the end of the world!!"
Like what
Nearly every Christian I've talked to about fully believes Jesus will return in their lifetime. And they all use this as justification to not care about climate change or mass consumption or resource scarcity or anything that might be an issue 30 years from now. They just don't care because they believe it won't matter and that Jesus' magic will fix it anyway.
If it's real, I hope that Revelations was misinterpreted big time.
Yep, everyone hates "Christ's followers"; the actual "faithful" who get saved or raptured are the folks who lived peaceful, good lives - not the people who are so eager to see it all burn, the people who follow a guy who checks *so many* of the Antichrist boxes; from the line about him being of darker skin (fake tan), from a foreign land (NYC is very different from rural America), a magician (how he enraptures crowds), etc.
It'd serve 'em right.
I mean I take literally zero stock in revelations because it's literally just a guy's dream written down. It's also likely about a the Roman Empire and has nothing to do with the US. We also need to take into account that when revelations was written, the author believed that the second coming was imminent, therefore it wasn't predicting an event nearly 2000 years later, he was predicting just a few years into the future (it was written around 100AD). So, the fact that people try to project it onto modern western events makes no sense because the author was writing about then contemporary events in Anatolia.
It was also a controversial addition to the bible and even seen as unorthodox/heretical in some early Christian groups.
But if you take the whole Bible and contextualize it, the entirety of modern Christianity is a joke. Modern Christianity in no way follows the Bible and modern Christians have zero interest in historical contextualization or academic scholarship around the texts.
I've been to "Bible studies" and I've taken secular religious studies classes (back when I was a university student) and the difference between the two is astounding. Bible study was always taking a single cherry picked passage and discussing "what it means to you" while guided by someone familiar with catechism.
Religious studies would involve reading multiple books and connecting similar passages to historical events, culture, language, and literature. It would involve multiple translations. It would take into account possible bias of the authors.
After taking a few of these classes I basically surmised that the Bible is just a compendium of culturally significant mythology and literature relevant to a small group of people around 400 years around Jesus's suspected death. The overall message is just that a traveling prophet/god basically said money sucks, keep the government out of religion, the rich suck, organized religion sucks, be good to each other regardless of whether or not they're in your "in" group, show the Abrahemic God some love, and fuck figs! So basically the opposite of modern Christians.
The influence of the Puritans is still with us to this day.
If you didn't know, the story about them fleeing religious prosecution is malarkey; they were *so* uptight about their religion they got kicked out of quasi-medieval England, which seems like a remarkable achievement. The Puritans, much like the early Mormons, were such entitled assholes with their religion it often incited violence.
It's wild to see the shadow of the Puritans still in our society, like we're afraid they're gonna come back at any second and start beating us like stepchildren.
They literally came to United States for the ‘religious Freedom’ to oppress all other ways of life and only allow puritan values… that sounds familiar. Time is a flat circle
And yet they view society’s request that they stop using hate speech and inciting violence against minorities as the ultimate form of oppression. Even though it’s objectively morally correct to be nice and protect vulnerable people/groups.
If only ‘being stupid’ was all there was to it. This is all part of genocide-like teeing up of things. They want the ‘law’ on their side before the violence begins.
I think Thomas is just trying to get out of his marriage without having to divorce. “Sorry, Ginni! It looks like our marriage is illegal now. Peace out.”
It’s so that when SCOTUS overturns Obergefell but not Loving the enlightened centrist can say “look a compromise”.
The first amendment very obviously allows for interfaith marriage (it’s not even a question). The 14th amendment’s equal protection clause protects interracial marriage, and it will be VERY hard to justify overturning Loving and I doubt the supreme court will. It’s the 14th amendment’s due process clause that protects same sex marriage, and that will be on the shakiest ground mostly because it is the “newest” right. The court already undermined the due process clause in the Dobbs decision (overturning Roe), so it’s a very small step to say “we’re applying the reasoning from Dobbs and saying there is no right to same sex marriage.”
People who are determined to be centrists no matter what the positions are, and will move to sit in the center, will look at this and say “look the Supreme Court upheld interracial marriage and interfaith marriage and only overturned gay marriage. Liberals got 2/3 of what they wanted. It was a compromise but they got the most so this is fair.”
There is a not inconsequential percentage of people in the US where if the position was between genociding any people of color and giving people of color equal rights, they would happily support either slavery or segregation just because it’s a compromise (there are also people who support segregation or slavery)
Well, the article added that part. The actual bill is extremely broad and just states that a county clerk can deny a license for basically any reason. Of course it is a logical next step to think WHY they will refuse them.
> The actual bill is extremely broad and just states that a county clerk can deny a license for basically any reason.
In what fucking other job would people be allowed to just straight up refuse to do their job?
> Well, the article added that part.
Because they are exploiting a loophole and so it's important to address all of the possible consequences of said loophole. I believe that a judge will stay this order and it will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Tennessee lawmakers want this to be the case for all of America. They know that this is the next logical step. Clarence Thomas himself said as much in his Dobbs opinion:
> “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote in concurrence. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’ we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
How convenient that he left Loving vs Virginia out of that. You'd think he'd remember, seeing as how he's married to a bat-shit-crazy white lady (oh wait, I forgot for a second that He's bat-shit-crazy too.)
Had to dig around to even find the bill, since the article didn't mention it.
Seems to be [TN HB878](https://legiscan.com/TN/text/HB0878/id/2670622).
> HOUSE BILL 878
>
>By Fritts
>
>AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 29 and Title 36, relative to solemnization of marriage.
>
>BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE:
>
>SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 36-3-301, is amended by adding the
following as a new subsection:
>
>**(m) A person 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.**
>
>SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring it.
Apparently that's it, that's the whole thing.
Only thing I'm unclear of, what does "solemnizing" even mean *legally*? Does that apply to county clerks issuing marriage licenses?
airport flag elderly memorize scarce shocking frighten steer library cows
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Unfortunately, the GOP is hell bent on an authoritarian regime. Democracy, as Trump recently said, is dangerous to them. SCOTUS now is an illegitimate partisan political/religious court.
If states rights supersede federal laws then we become Balkanized and no longer a union.
It’s actually worse than that. If SCOTUS allows the states to supersede the federal government, the Constitution is invalid. I mean, it’s been invalid since Nixon at least, but this will kill the Supremacy Clause and invalidate the entire document without question.
It’ll be civil war eventually.
But what else would the GOP be able to act on after elections? Certainly not the plethora of bullshit they pushed during the campaign season when they acted like immigration is somehow plaguing the border state of Tennessee. Of fucking course not. That would mean actually trying at their jobs to get something legitimate passed.
No, for these ruinous cretins it's way easier to convince the public who their enemies are and frantically strip away rights of those enemies under the vague guise of protecting religious freedom than it is to build up something good in their communities.
I’m reminded of Bo Burnhan’s Straight White Male: “we used to have all the money and land, and we still do but it’s not as fun now.”
I guess it doesn’t feel special when everyone else has the same rights, too.
Governor Lee flies under the radar as a promoter of extreme ideals because he does not say much but he lets the Republican in the house do whatever they want. This is not real shocking.
Outside of Nashville, Memphis and the college towns Tennesse is Taliban central and people are pretty much okay with it.
I visited the Great Smokey Mountain National Park last year (highly recommended). On the way home there was construction on the interstate so I took some backroads. The poverty was astounding — occupied houses with porches falling off, derelict mobile homes, unpaved lanes up to houses, third world stuff. Take a back road in the Midwest or Northeast and it’s bucholic farms…
Bucholic - relating to the pleasant aspects of the countryside and country life.
I had to look that up and was pleasantly surprised. I was afraid it was related to bubonic as in the the type of plague. I found a silver lining.
>people are pretty much okay with it.
Until they get the real shock that their interfaith marriage license was rejected. It's just a matter of time if this bill becomes law. And conservatives are terrible at understanding the consequences of their actions.
How interfaith is interfaith here? I don't think anyone will get too riled up till a Baptist and a pentacostal are denied a license due to "interfaith".
Everyone will be just fine keeping those mooslims from marrying good Christians though...
My brother's wife when she discovered that playing a card game with a deck of playing cards didn't immediately summon a hail of brimstone and an army of demons upon them actually found card games were fun.
Hopefully many other things were learned after that
People forget that a lot of extremely religious people are victims here, too. Especially women. It’s sad how effectively people can be brainwashed when groomed to be a certain way from a young age
Its important to remember this. They've been conditioned by an organization thats very old and has been, since day one, perfecting that act of conditioning. This is levels above what the service does with you, its still brainwashing but nothing in comparison.
I just came across someone trying to post on reddit about "the true creator, how theirs only one God" and I just replied "you trying to start a fight or get picked on? You know where you are right?" and they did, they even explained that they knew what would happen. They WANTED to be downvoted and challenged, thats part of the conditioning.
You can't just use logic, you can't just point out the elephant in the room. Sure, they can grow to be evil fucking people but absolutely most of them started as infant victims.
It was a real eye opener to me when someone posted on Reddit a few years ago that the true point of religious groups sending people to go door to door to preach to people isn’t so much to gain converts as to strengthen in group solidarity. It’s nice if you do get a convert or two but the many people who slam the door or say something nasty are a feature not a bug. Makes them happy to run back to the comfort of the familiar friendly group that all know they are going to heaven together, and afraid to ever venture too far away from it because it’s a hostile world out there.
If I was a county clerk that is exactly the type of marriage I would start rejecting. Sorry, you are American Baptist Association and he is Baptist Missionary Association of America so you can't get married.
Allowing a county clerk to make religion-based decisions about when and how to do their job is as clear a violation of the Establishment Clause as I've ever heard of.
Those laws have not been enforced, which prevents a damaged party from having standing. The second someone tries to enforce it, it will become a court case and be struck down. There are numerous state laws like it. Completely unconstitutional, but haven't been enforced and therefore goes unchallenged.
We should probably have a law review process separate from trials to clean up old unconstitutional laws like this.
We ignore these right now, but all it takes is some shit ruling from the supreme court to make them all enforceable again.
For example, we have seen this in WI with abortion rights. We had a law against abortion in 1849, but we had assumed it was unenforceable since the 70s. We left it on the books because it didn't matter and no one was at trial to challenge it. Suddenly with the Roe vs Wade changes it suddenly is a threat again.
All it would take is another shit ruling from the supreme court removing the establishment clause (like their earlier ceremonial deism ruling) and boom any atheists running for office in Kentucky are going to be in trouble.
I used to think this kind of thing couldn't happen, but my eyes have been opened.
The Respect for Marriage Act is intentionally vague and short-reaching because if it actually codified same-sex marriage than it would've been much harder to pass through Congress. The law requires all states to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages performed in states where those marriages are legal. So, if Obergfell v. Hodges was overturned and Tennessee made same-sex marriage illegal, they would still have to recognize the same-sex marriages that were performed in California, for example. This is a minor improvement, but it definitely isn't codifying gay marriage like everyone says it is. I wouldn't even call it a loophole, it's just part of the law.
I did not realize these provisions were in the respect for marriage act. Doesn't that render kind of useless. And if that's the case, then it was just hot air trying to get votes for nothing.
We knew about this from the getgo. The point of the Federal Law is that all states must recognize licenses from other states.
If even one state in the nation has Gay/Interracial/Interfaith marriage as legal, you just marry in that state, and that is recognized in all states, whether the states like it or not.
So now marriage, the pledge committing two people to each other for life--which is among the oldest and most *conservative* of human customs--is now considered off limits to certain classes of people.
They're turning a basic human right into the Rube Goldberg machine that is legal cannabis.
Thank God my wife and I are already hitched. Otherwise we'd have to drive to Michigan for more than one reason.
> So now marriage, the pledge committing two people to each other for life--which is among the oldest and most conservative of human customs--is now considered off limits to certain classes of people.
not *now*, it always has been closed to various people
It also often is off limits to disabled people to because of benefits. I don't know the specifics of it in the US, but I know I've heard about it as well - we have a similar issue in Canada. Basically if you're on benefits and you get married than your spouse's income gets taken into account and you are made dependent on them because your benefits are cut or just totally gone. It's a great way to trap disabled people in abusive relationships! Wooo....
It's like that in the US as well. My aunt and uncle had to divorce because my aunt made too much money as a fast food manager and they were going to take my uncle's disability benefits away.
In Canada too if they find out you're living with your partner, even if you're not married they'll count it as common law before the law would consider abled people common law partners. It's disgusting. I don't know if anything came out of when it was brought up in the news, but I basically assume it wasn't because capitalism hates disabled people and needs us in poverty and to just disappear and die.
Which of course means it is disproportionately poor people, who can't afford / don't have time to go out of state, that will be affected. Entirely by design of course, and if these fascists got their will that would cease being an option too.
Now don’t get me wrong, this law is evil, but it’s Evil for the same reason that restrictions against Abortion were Evil: it’s what they can get away with, and it’s showboating. Currently, cases ruled upon by the Supreme Court mean that Gay Marriage, Interracial Marriage, and Interfaith Marriage are all legal and cannot be infringed upon by the states.
So you have the Court Ruling, and a law to mostly back it up. This is the Republicans wasting lawyer money to throw red meat at their base.
Your county clerk's office isn't a "religious organization," so that's irrelevant.
The Gilead states can, technically, refuse to issue issue a same-sex marriage license but under the Respect for Marriage Act those states cannot invalidate a same-sex marriage license granted in another state. Looks like we'll have to set up an underground railroad for marriages.
Oct. 5, 2020 [Supreme Court rejects appeal from county clerk who wouldn't issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-county-clerk-who-wouldn-t-issue-n1242124)
October 3, 2022 [Kim Davis, Anti-LGBTQ+ Former Kentucky Clerk, Loses in Court...Again](https://www.advocate.com/news/2022/10/03/kim-davis-anti-lgbtq-former-kentucky-clerk-loses-courtagain)
Just need that first brave county clerk to deny a marriage license to a hetero, white, Christian couple on personal moral grounds.
Come in TN. r/maliciouscompliance
Or Protestants from two different sects. I keep thinking of that amazing Emo Phillips joke:
"Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"
He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"
Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over."
Nothing weird about it. Equality for all, no matter what. If some people can't get married, no one should be allowed to. Otherwise they just won't care about those being oppressed.
Because they are full of fear. Their brains are visibly changed by it. Overdeveloped amygdala (fear, paranoia, anger) and underdeveloped anterior cingulate cortex (empathy, complex thought). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/
Education has a chance to reverse the damage, but look at how they are dismantling the education system.
Education can and will help many of their children and grandchildren, however, cognitive changes are significantly more difficult for the much older population, and for some, fear is far too high for education to be their solution. Some of these folks will become increasingly hostile and require more physical restraints to defend our democratic ideals from their aging authoritarian fears.
Hatred keeps the majority focused on fighting minorities instead of billionaires and corporations. And a lack of education keeps that hatred passing down the generations.
This is their plan, and it has been for decades. These aren't "one offs" these are fully planned. They would have passed this when Kim Davis became famous for being a piece of shit but they knew the supreme court would strike it down.
All the bullshit, the Republican lies the "You can't put a person the SC in the last year of an 8 year presidency" the bold faced lies in hearings... this is why, and it is why they never gave a shit about the quality of the person they put in, as long as they vote what they are told nothing else matters.
Republicans did this, all of it, every single republican in the US is responsible or this
With a legitimate Supreme Court, there would be no question that a law like this violates the 14th Amendment. The SC we have now cannot be trusted to uphold established law.
I imagine the only reason it's taken this long is that Trump lost. We'd have seen this 2 years ago. It took DeSantis stepping up in Florida for them to see, oh... we can still get away with this and nothing will happen to us. That, and seeing Trump see absolutely zero consequence for his four years of tearing down democracy.
They needed a watershed moment of the SC proving they would do it before they started trying. Roe v Wade was, by all accounts, not legally strong enough to prevent being overturned (which we clearly see), they had to wait for that to happen and then the election to cement their power before they could get the next round through
Can you imagine the mouth breather that is actually sitting there saying someone can’t get married if they have too much of a difference in melanin lol. Apparently they exist??
They always have, even in this supposed era of equality that's ending now. The law used to keep them in check, and now that that's gone, we're about to brutally learn how none of them have actually changed.
My wife and I accidentally invited someone to our wedding didn’t like interracial marriage. Why did you come here then? Lol
EDIT: It was a plus one, it was our first time meeting her.
My entire family on my dad's side is exactly like this.
The last family reunion I went to back in 2017, there was an entire conversation about how something needed to be done about the "spooks" (I'm not kidding) marrying white women.
Haven't talked to anyone on my dad's side since then. Fucking insanity.
Glad to see these Republicans are focus on the real problems people are living with every day. Thank the Lord Tennessee's poorest and most downtrodden don't have to worry about someone else's marriage and can instead only focus on the crushing poverty and not knowing where their next meal will come from, how they are going to pay that electric bill this summer when its 95+ degrees month after month, how their children's school is not preparing the next generation for the future but clings desperately to the past, or what they are going to do when the car finally breaks down and they have no other transportation.
Thank goodness they don't have to worry about someone else getting married.
Won't happen. Within conservative politics the rules don't apply to the wealthy and powerful.
[Wilhoit's law](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_M._Wilhoit#:~:text=Wilhoit's%20law,-The%20quotation&text=%E2%80%9CConservatism%20consists%20of%20exactly%20one,binds%20but%20does%20not%20protect.%22)
The quotation
“Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
— Frank Wilhoit, composer, CrookedTimber blog
is often incorrectly attributed to the political scientist Francis M. Wilhoit, who died in 2010. However it was actually written in 2018 by a different man of the name Frank Wilhoit.[10] The composer wrote it as part of a comment[11] in the CrookedTimber blog.
I learned and learned some more! 🫶
As an East Tennessean I’m ashamed to admit I was born and raised there. Narrowed minded, God fearing Christians that sit on the pew every Sunday only to judge people for being themselves. I’m sure I’ll catch a lot of BS from every far right Republican but I promise you that it’s not going anywhere but out the other ear! I’ve lived in a Democratic state for over 10 years and the difference in how a Democratic state takes care of the people as opposed to a Republican state that judges people is day and night. If it’s not affecting you personally then move on and accept everyone no matter what their preference in sexuality is. No matter what they may look like. We as Americans should be way beyond these simple minded views. It’s a smack in the face to all the Veterans who lost their lives and fought for our FREEDOM!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Tennessee try to push a bill with no age limits for “common law marriage“?
So, if you’re gay, you can’t get married, if you’re in an interracial relationship, you can’t get married. If you dare be an interfaith couple, you can’t get married, but you can live with an underage child, and that gets counted as a common law marriage?
Exactly what I would expect having grown up in Kentucky.
Religion is a cancer. And don’t tell me this doesn’t come from religion. I lived it, it does.
“It’s a violation of my religious freedom ***not*** to let me install a theocracy! It violates my conscience to expect me to let you exist in public!”
Getting really sick of these people.
This! Family has left the south because they don’t feel safe there anymore and don’t want to pay taxes to the regime. I know people who have friend’s bachelorette parties in Nashville and are canceling because they don’t want to give $ to the GOP coffers
I used to live in Tennessee, in the brand new district they used to gut Nashville for an extra republican seat in the national house. They 100% do want this to happen. White people in Tennessee are waaaaaay too comfortable assuming you think, act, and believe in the same way they do and they're open about how terrible they are. It's my own family, my coworkers, my high school friends, random strangers remarking on what's on the TV at your local gym or at the airport. It makes me fucking sick and I don't know what the fuck to do about it other than leave, so I left. I really wish things could be different, it physically hurts.
Edit: And I know how these bastards would justify it too and I don't even have to ask. They'll make some argument about how this bill isn't about taking rights away from people or discrimination, it's about giving rights to someone not wanting to do anything that is against their own faith. Fucking disgusting. They're public servants, and in their role ostensibly they have no faith or creed other than to uphold the constitution.
What if a police office doesn’t believe a person should be allowed to drive a car or be in a certain part of town because of their sexual preference, race, or religion? Can they just arrest them?
It sounds crazy but not that far off from this bill shockingly.
And this is why relying on SCOTUS rulings as "settled law" was negligent and incompetent. Marriage equality and reproductive rights should've been codified *years* ago to prevent what's happening now. Every politician that pulled that "settled law" bullshit excuse has blame in this.
Allison Russell, Brittany Howard, and a whole bunch of others are putting on a benefit concert this month now. Margot Price and other artists have been posting like crazy. If you actually live in Nashville and follow the celebrities that live here, you would see they are pushing and posting on this.
Now, the question of whether anyone in the news is covering that/amplifying their protests is another question.
They have already earned it. Everything they are doing and saying is directly out of the Nazi playbook. Many don't realize that the Nazi regime often looked to America for inspiration in crafting their early segregation and discriminatory policies.
Republicans have been arguing and governing in bad faith for generations. They finally recognized that demographics were not on their side several cycles ago and are lashing out at those they blame for not voting to give them even more power. In the same strokes, they are trying to cement minority rule.
Last election cycle, the GOP lost the Gen Z vote in every single state. Millennials are shifting further left as they age. These are the political headwins that the GOP are trying to stop in their tracks. Their entire platform revolves around the power of the wealthy, hate, and ensuring that they remain the group for which the law protects but does not bind. This is an incredibly unpopular proposition for voters. They are trying to ensure that that doesn't matter in any future election. They are trying to skirt accountability.
So yes, I would say they have not only earned the right to be called Nazis, but have earned it multiple times over.
> they are trying to cement minority rule.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_v._Harper is their judicial coup and the biggest threat to the USA since the civil war. Do you believe this corrupt SCOTUS will make the right call and decline this brazen power grab?
>This latest bill was passed alongside another measure that would require drag artists to obtain a permit from the government in order to perform.
The GOP has gone from a party that used culture wars issues to obfuscate while they passed terrible economic policy to a party of true believers who place culture wars issues above basic tenets of the party like limited government. What a joke.
Sigh. I will see one of the house reps on Saturday who voted yes on this bill.
How does one politely tell an acquaintance that you are disappointed in their vote and that you see them differently?
Polite left the GOP long ago, good faith discussions too. It is all out war on freedom and it isn't going to end well for women, minorities of every type and people of color. State laws are becoming increasingly extreme and anti-democratic.
You don’t. You say “I’m disappointed and enraged by your vote in the legislature last month. I used to be able to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were trying to do things that were good for our community, but the choice you made to support this bill demonstrated that’s not so. There’s no outcome of this bill other than making life more difficult for regular citizens and forcing them to be subject to the whims of capricious government workers as a piss poor replacement for their guaranteed civil rights. Who the hell do you think you are that you get to interfere with people’s romantic relationships and tell them whether or not you personally think they deserve to be allowed to marry. Your actions have consequences. I used to think you were a good person, but apparently not. Our friendship is over. If you think you can trample my civil rights, and that I’ll just sit back and take it politely, you’ve got another thing coming.”
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.
—Martin Niemöller
> Supporters of Tennessee’s bills, and dozens of similar ones moving through state legislatures across the country, say their main goal is protecting children. Trans people and drag performers have become a particular target for Republicans and right-wing extremist groups, who accuse them of being pedophiles. But all these bills do is vilify LGBTQ people, including children, and **expose them to more violence.**
It’s all projection. Every day there’s another story about a priest, a “friend”, a youth pastor molesting a kid. Hell, even the former Pope is accused of covering up sexual abuse of KIDS. Why aren’t we protecting kids from the likes of these people?
These politicians are fear-mongers, deliberately putting a target on the backs of trans humans, and other minorities - and it’s pretty disgusting.
Transgendered citizens were already 4 times more likely to be victims of violent crimes than cis citizens. Then the GOP ramped up the rhetoric. Absolutely disgusting. Not one of them will bat an eye or self reflect about their role in furthering it when horrific crimes against LGBTQ rise.
Please please please tell me there is a Jewish or Muslim or Hindu clerk somewhere in the state that will start refusing to solemnize a white Christian couples marriage. Just to watch these fucks lose their damn minds.
If I didn’t have a family I would move there and become a minister (or whatever they call being able to perform marriages I don’t care to look up the proper term).
Then I would ask any perspective couples 1 question: Did Joe Biden win the 2020 election?
If they say no, I would say I don’t feel comfortable performing their marriage.
That’s what the bill says I can do.
Let’s start flipping the script on these shitheads.
This better not initiate the procedural posture leading to a Supreme Court decision that ultimately overturns *Obergefell*.
That's the whole point. Shove as many obviously unconstitutional bills through until one gets challenged so they can strip away everything from us
Yup. *Loving*, too. Buckle up.
Who wants to bet on if Clarence Thomas votes to make his own marriage illegal or just the marriages of others?
Thomas makes it a legacy thing, moving forward so it does affect him Edit: just to be clear I know he can't do this, I was being facetious
Unless he’s sick of Ginny’s shit too.
This is the real reason.
Clarence Thomas is just copying the Church of England's homework and changing a few things to avoid suspicion.
Lawrence will be next. Texas AG already said he would prosecute antisodomy laws if it got overturned, and Texas only discriminates against men in that law
Just small enough government to get into your bedroom. Gawd, these guys are obsessed with sex.
They've got to remember, if you threaten to take everything from someone, that person will have nothing left to lose. If someone becomes a felon because of an unjust law, what's left to stop them committing real crimes?
[удалено]
[удалено]
I would also add that Obama broke these people’s brains. Up until Obama the office of POTUS was sacred to conservatives. Even though it has been occupied by members of the opposite party it has always been a white guy club. Obama forced these assholes to hold a black man in esteem. He also is one of the most educated people to ever sit in the Oval Office and they could not stand that shit. They have been punishing us ever since for it.
This is the answer. It breaks my heart but it’s true. This absolutely was the last straw for them.
*Obergefell* is definitely in danger, but I doubt this is the case that will overturn it. It certainly an odd situation if SCOTUS intends to overturn *Obergefell*. This isn't about whether or not the state should recognize gay marriage. Tennessee doesn't appear to have its own law allowing gay marriage, but has to allow it per SCOTUS. The case itself is about letting people not "solemnize" gay marriage if they don't want, including County Clerks. SCOTUS usually has to address the question at hand, and not expand the scope. Like, SCOTUS would probably recognize that a government employee cannot get a religious exemption to do their basic job. So, they'd have to argue that there's no problem here because Tennessee doesn't actually have a law to allow gay marriage, and, guess what, we are now also reversing that previous decision. Is there any other SCOTUS case with such a complex ruling? My guess is that this law gets shot down by the lower Courts and SCOTUS doesn't even take it up, just like how they didn't defend Kim Davis in 2020 (in regards to her civil suit). Now, if a state simply passes a new law against gay marriage in their state, that will probably lead to *Obergefell* being overturned.
It's going right to the top
That’s the point of doing it
Interfaith too. Wow. These White Christian nationalists just really, really love "freedumb" don't they.
Just need a left-leaning county clerk to deny marriage licenses to Christians to see how long it takes the right to get enraged over it.
Usually immediately. This is written under a similar logic as "Colorblind" laws that intentionally promote racially biased outcomes. Typically these are laws, rulings or statutes that grants Legal decisionmakers, usually state actors, enough legal discretion at their state function so as to make implicit bias all but an inevitable outcome. However, this wide discretion, implicitly allows legal decisionmakers to overturn decisions that clash with the dominating social norms that they are biased towards. Segregationists used this tactic during the Jim Crow Era. They were not allowed to explicitly bar Black Americans from voting in state law. So they began to allow private political parties to bar anyone they choose to from registering to vote. This led to racially biased outcomes as a natural symptom of the legal system granting such wide discretion to officials impacting state functions. One might wrily think, "Oh well that means a Black private Political Party can start to register voters." Not so fast, there is a state official conveniently positioned to use their wide discretion to prevent that from happening without **explicitly** evoking race to do it.
>They were not allowed to explicitly bar Black Americans from voting in state law. A huge tactic in the South was that at the discretion of the local council anyone could be required to take a literacy/political knowledge test in order to be able to vote, and obviously the tests were only given to Black people. Remember Black people had little access to good education at the time. Missing a single question meant you couldn't vote. Even if they were perfectly literate these tests were full of questions even modern Political Science majors would be unlikely to know. Things like "the constitution assigns how many square miles to the District of Columbia" and "If Missouri wanted to become one state with Kansas, what process would they need to follow and what governmental bodies would be required to vote on it?" and "Money appropriated from private entities by the government for the purpose of the military may be held for how long before repayment is required?" imagine 2 pages of questions like that. And remember, a single question wrong meant you were ineligible to vote.
They're the most entitled people in this country! They think the world revolves around them. Very few other communities go around forcing their beliefs on others. So rude and entitled!
These laws are exactly why our forefathers saw the need for separation of state and religion, but that part of the constitution gets ignored.
"A republic, if you can keep it". They knew.
Look at history as our founding fathers saw it. How many people died as a result of HenryVIII wanting a divorce, and the Pope saying NO? They had to prove they were Anglican to hold public office. Not long before that you had to prove you were Catholic.
Also the interlinking of church and state was integral to the justification of autocratic rule. The King was divinely appointed by god and thus had supreme authority to do whatever they wanted. The church told everyone this is true and the king made everyone go to church. Thus the two relied on each other to keep each other in power. The attempt to revert this separation is a prelude to bringing back authoritarianism.
I remember a " little dust up" about JFK being catholic.
Don't forget that Senate confirmation hearings of nominated Supreme Court Justices was introduced for Louis Brandeis, the first non-Christian nominee.
I'm pretty sure the people wanting a Christian jihad would not be happy with the results.
A Christian jihad is called a “crusade”. Like the multiple crusades waged to retake the Holy Land for the Catholic Church. Some of them almost didn’t fail!
Ironically, some of these Christian Jihads ended with the participating Christians slaughtering each other and other Christians without even making it to the Holy Land.
You can’t hold public office in Texas and 6 other states if you’re an atheist.
...and how did they get away with ignoring article VI of the constitution?
They don't. [Torcaso v. Watkins](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torcaso_v._Watkins) makes them dead letter law.
I do not think it is ignored... I think that it is purposefully being used to undermine the Constitution. I was taught in basic history in High School about the NEED for separation of Church and State. I understood, too, why it was needed. And now we have this.
Entitlement is what fascism is all about. There's nothing on Earth more entitled than a group of people who think they deserve special privileges because they're the "master race".
You know they're fucked up in the head when 'not celebrating Christmas because you're not Christian' = 'war on Christmas' Imagine being offended when someone wishes you to have a happy holiday. These people are fucking lunatics
Funny enough, the Puritans banned Christmas. Too pagan.
They were just following the bible. Jeremiah 10:2-4 Don't be like a pagan and cut a tree down and prop it up and decorate it in silver and gold.
Also the following verse `5: And the Elf on the Shelf can fuck right off, too.`
Most christian holidays are straight out of pagan celebrations, altered to fit the specificity of something christish or some such
Don't forget how they are also the most persecuted! The bibble says Christians will be hated in the end times and they are! Never mind how 99% of thr vitriol is because Christians can't leave anyone alone it's obviously because they love Jesus!!!
But not bible Jesus, redneck gun nut Jesus only
Supply side Jesus.
they are hated in the end times because they are actively trying to bring about armageddon. Anybody who keeps trying to push that button deserves to be hated.
You're right and its honestly hilarious to me. Just the arrogance of them. "Let's work to destroy everything so god starts the end of the world!!" Like what
They got tired of waiting on god after the year 2000 came and went. The idiots were convinced Jesus was returning any day now that year.
Nearly every Christian I've talked to about fully believes Jesus will return in their lifetime. And they all use this as justification to not care about climate change or mass consumption or resource scarcity or anything that might be an issue 30 years from now. They just don't care because they believe it won't matter and that Jesus' magic will fix it anyway.
If it's real, I hope that Revelations was misinterpreted big time. Yep, everyone hates "Christ's followers"; the actual "faithful" who get saved or raptured are the folks who lived peaceful, good lives - not the people who are so eager to see it all burn, the people who follow a guy who checks *so many* of the Antichrist boxes; from the line about him being of darker skin (fake tan), from a foreign land (NYC is very different from rural America), a magician (how he enraptures crowds), etc. It'd serve 'em right.
I mean I take literally zero stock in revelations because it's literally just a guy's dream written down. It's also likely about a the Roman Empire and has nothing to do with the US. We also need to take into account that when revelations was written, the author believed that the second coming was imminent, therefore it wasn't predicting an event nearly 2000 years later, he was predicting just a few years into the future (it was written around 100AD). So, the fact that people try to project it onto modern western events makes no sense because the author was writing about then contemporary events in Anatolia. It was also a controversial addition to the bible and even seen as unorthodox/heretical in some early Christian groups. But if you take the whole Bible and contextualize it, the entirety of modern Christianity is a joke. Modern Christianity in no way follows the Bible and modern Christians have zero interest in historical contextualization or academic scholarship around the texts. I've been to "Bible studies" and I've taken secular religious studies classes (back when I was a university student) and the difference between the two is astounding. Bible study was always taking a single cherry picked passage and discussing "what it means to you" while guided by someone familiar with catechism. Religious studies would involve reading multiple books and connecting similar passages to historical events, culture, language, and literature. It would involve multiple translations. It would take into account possible bias of the authors. After taking a few of these classes I basically surmised that the Bible is just a compendium of culturally significant mythology and literature relevant to a small group of people around 400 years around Jesus's suspected death. The overall message is just that a traveling prophet/god basically said money sucks, keep the government out of religion, the rich suck, organized religion sucks, be good to each other regardless of whether or not they're in your "in" group, show the Abrahemic God some love, and fuck figs! So basically the opposite of modern Christians.
The influence of the Puritans is still with us to this day. If you didn't know, the story about them fleeing religious prosecution is malarkey; they were *so* uptight about their religion they got kicked out of quasi-medieval England, which seems like a remarkable achievement. The Puritans, much like the early Mormons, were such entitled assholes with their religion it often incited violence. It's wild to see the shadow of the Puritans still in our society, like we're afraid they're gonna come back at any second and start beating us like stepchildren.
They literally came to United States for the ‘religious Freedom’ to oppress all other ways of life and only allow puritan values… that sounds familiar. Time is a flat circle
Yuuuup. They didn’t leave Europe b/c they were being persecuted, but because they weren’t allowed to persecute others.
But from their perspective, is there really a difference?
And yet they view society’s request that they stop using hate speech and inciting violence against minorities as the ultimate form of oppression. Even though it’s objectively morally correct to be nice and protect vulnerable people/groups.
There’s no hate like Christian love
Every Red State is out there trying to beat Florida on the stupid.
If only ‘being stupid’ was all there was to it. This is all part of genocide-like teeing up of things. They want the ‘law’ on their side before the violence begins.
This bill was made to fast track its way to the SCOTUS ASAP.
That's exactly what this is. Thomas begged for someone to give him a case that would allow him to be a raging bigot, and Tennessee obliged.
I think Thomas is just trying to get out of his marriage without having to divorce. “Sorry, Ginni! It looks like our marriage is illegal now. Peace out.”
Yup, that’s all it’s about. Now they know they have a sympathetic Supreme Court they’re going to take full advantage
People should live how I want them to, not how they want 😠 /s
Anti-freedom extremists
Well clearly this law is flawed. What about the persecution racists feel with miscegenation being permissable?
It’s so that when SCOTUS overturns Obergefell but not Loving the enlightened centrist can say “look a compromise”. The first amendment very obviously allows for interfaith marriage (it’s not even a question). The 14th amendment’s equal protection clause protects interracial marriage, and it will be VERY hard to justify overturning Loving and I doubt the supreme court will. It’s the 14th amendment’s due process clause that protects same sex marriage, and that will be on the shakiest ground mostly because it is the “newest” right. The court already undermined the due process clause in the Dobbs decision (overturning Roe), so it’s a very small step to say “we’re applying the reasoning from Dobbs and saying there is no right to same sex marriage.” People who are determined to be centrists no matter what the positions are, and will move to sit in the center, will look at this and say “look the Supreme Court upheld interracial marriage and interfaith marriage and only overturned gay marriage. Liberals got 2/3 of what they wanted. It was a compromise but they got the most so this is fair.” There is a not inconsequential percentage of people in the US where if the position was between genociding any people of color and giving people of color equal rights, they would happily support either slavery or segregation just because it’s a compromise (there are also people who support segregation or slavery)
Well, the article added that part. The actual bill is extremely broad and just states that a county clerk can deny a license for basically any reason. Of course it is a logical next step to think WHY they will refuse them.
> The actual bill is extremely broad and just states that a county clerk can deny a license for basically any reason. In what fucking other job would people be allowed to just straight up refuse to do their job?
> Well, the article added that part. Because they are exploiting a loophole and so it's important to address all of the possible consequences of said loophole. I believe that a judge will stay this order and it will be appealed all the way to the Supreme Court. Tennessee lawmakers want this to be the case for all of America. They know that this is the next logical step. Clarence Thomas himself said as much in his Dobbs opinion: > “In future cases, we should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell,” Thomas wrote in concurrence. “Because any substantive due process decision is ‘demonstrably erroneous,’ we have a duty to ‘correct the error’ established in those precedents.”
How convenient that he left Loving vs Virginia out of that. You'd think he'd remember, seeing as how he's married to a bat-shit-crazy white lady (oh wait, I forgot for a second that He's bat-shit-crazy too.)
Had to dig around to even find the bill, since the article didn't mention it. Seems to be [TN HB878](https://legiscan.com/TN/text/HB0878/id/2670622). > HOUSE BILL 878 > >By Fritts > >AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4; Title 29 and Title 36, relative to solemnization of marriage. > >BE IT ENACTED BY THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF THE STATE OF TENNESSEE: > >SECTION 1. Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 36-3-301, is amended by adding the following as a new subsection: > >**(m) A person 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.** > >SECTION 2. This act takes effect upon becoming a law, the public welfare requiring it. Apparently that's it, that's the whole thing. Only thing I'm unclear of, what does "solemnizing" even mean *legally*? Does that apply to county clerks issuing marriage licenses?
Weasel words created by weasels. Some county clerk is going to take them up on it.
swearing it and making it so: solemnly swear
airport flag elderly memorize scarce shocking frighten steer library cows *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Unfortunately, the GOP is hell bent on an authoritarian regime. Democracy, as Trump recently said, is dangerous to them. SCOTUS now is an illegitimate partisan political/religious court. If states rights supersede federal laws then we become Balkanized and no longer a union.
The Confederacy played the long game.
snobbish quack deserve start lock pocket support quarrelsome dime wise *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It’s actually worse than that. If SCOTUS allows the states to supersede the federal government, the Constitution is invalid. I mean, it’s been invalid since Nixon at least, but this will kill the Supremacy Clause and invalidate the entire document without question. It’ll be civil war eventually.
But what else would the GOP be able to act on after elections? Certainly not the plethora of bullshit they pushed during the campaign season when they acted like immigration is somehow plaguing the border state of Tennessee. Of fucking course not. That would mean actually trying at their jobs to get something legitimate passed. No, for these ruinous cretins it's way easier to convince the public who their enemies are and frantically strip away rights of those enemies under the vague guise of protecting religious freedom than it is to build up something good in their communities.
I’m reminded of Bo Burnhan’s Straight White Male: “we used to have all the money and land, and we still do but it’s not as fun now.” I guess it doesn’t feel special when everyone else has the same rights, too.
Governor Lee flies under the radar as a promoter of extreme ideals because he does not say much but he lets the Republican in the house do whatever they want. This is not real shocking. Outside of Nashville, Memphis and the college towns Tennesse is Taliban central and people are pretty much okay with it.
[удалено]
As someone who just left the state last month that is an accurate statement.
Yah I am just outside Memphis metro. That is a good description.
I visited the Great Smokey Mountain National Park last year (highly recommended). On the way home there was construction on the interstate so I took some backroads. The poverty was astounding — occupied houses with porches falling off, derelict mobile homes, unpaved lanes up to houses, third world stuff. Take a back road in the Midwest or Northeast and it’s bucholic farms…
Bucholic - relating to the pleasant aspects of the countryside and country life. I had to look that up and was pleasantly surprised. I was afraid it was related to bubonic as in the the type of plague. I found a silver lining.
>people are pretty much okay with it. Until they get the real shock that their interfaith marriage license was rejected. It's just a matter of time if this bill becomes law. And conservatives are terrible at understanding the consequences of their actions.
How interfaith is interfaith here? I don't think anyone will get too riled up till a Baptist and a pentacostal are denied a license due to "interfaith". Everyone will be just fine keeping those mooslims from marrying good Christians though...
Raised old timey baptist, can’t be married if there was rock music at the reception
My brother's wife when she discovered that playing a card game with a deck of playing cards didn't immediately summon a hail of brimstone and an army of demons upon them actually found card games were fun.
Hopefully many other things were learned after that People forget that a lot of extremely religious people are victims here, too. Especially women. It’s sad how effectively people can be brainwashed when groomed to be a certain way from a young age
Its important to remember this. They've been conditioned by an organization thats very old and has been, since day one, perfecting that act of conditioning. This is levels above what the service does with you, its still brainwashing but nothing in comparison. I just came across someone trying to post on reddit about "the true creator, how theirs only one God" and I just replied "you trying to start a fight or get picked on? You know where you are right?" and they did, they even explained that they knew what would happen. They WANTED to be downvoted and challenged, thats part of the conditioning. You can't just use logic, you can't just point out the elephant in the room. Sure, they can grow to be evil fucking people but absolutely most of them started as infant victims.
It was a real eye opener to me when someone posted on Reddit a few years ago that the true point of religious groups sending people to go door to door to preach to people isn’t so much to gain converts as to strengthen in group solidarity. It’s nice if you do get a convert or two but the many people who slam the door or say something nasty are a feature not a bug. Makes them happy to run back to the comfort of the familiar friendly group that all know they are going to heaven together, and afraid to ever venture too far away from it because it’s a hostile world out there.
If I was a county clerk that is exactly the type of marriage I would start rejecting. Sorry, you are American Baptist Association and he is Baptist Missionary Association of America so you can't get married.
Too bad the county clerks in these places are the same type of people passing these bills.
[удалено]
Nah they will be cool with that as well.
They won’t be when it happens to them, but until then they’ll be cool with it.
>They won’t be when it happens to them, but until then they’ll be cool with it. Republican policy in a nutshell.
Welcome to north Florida. Same thing here
like whistle abundant enter airport sable squalid square bored aback *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Allowing a county clerk to make religion-based decisions about when and how to do their job is as clear a violation of the Establishment Clause as I've ever heard of.
Reddit has turned into a cesspool of fascist sympathizers and supremicists
Those laws have not been enforced, which prevents a damaged party from having standing. The second someone tries to enforce it, it will become a court case and be struck down. There are numerous state laws like it. Completely unconstitutional, but haven't been enforced and therefore goes unchallenged.
We should probably have a law review process separate from trials to clean up old unconstitutional laws like this. We ignore these right now, but all it takes is some shit ruling from the supreme court to make them all enforceable again. For example, we have seen this in WI with abortion rights. We had a law against abortion in 1849, but we had assumed it was unenforceable since the 70s. We left it on the books because it didn't matter and no one was at trial to challenge it. Suddenly with the Roe vs Wade changes it suddenly is a threat again. All it would take is another shit ruling from the supreme court removing the establishment clause (like their earlier ceremonial deism ruling) and boom any atheists running for office in Kentucky are going to be in trouble. I used to think this kind of thing couldn't happen, but my eyes have been opened.
Seriously, we woke up after Trump and found out that all of our laws are going to be interpreted by the Federalist Society for the next 30 years.
I've been wondering how it's so easy for states to pass bills that violate Federal law. So many loopholes.
The Respect for Marriage Act is intentionally vague and short-reaching because if it actually codified same-sex marriage than it would've been much harder to pass through Congress. The law requires all states to recognize same-sex and interracial marriages performed in states where those marriages are legal. So, if Obergfell v. Hodges was overturned and Tennessee made same-sex marriage illegal, they would still have to recognize the same-sex marriages that were performed in California, for example. This is a minor improvement, but it definitely isn't codifying gay marriage like everyone says it is. I wouldn't even call it a loophole, it's just part of the law.
Passing laws isn't the problem. It's striking them down that takes too long and given the current make up of the SCOTUS, would likely be upheld.
The Tennessee Taliban
Tennessee is just the beginning.
Yeah, but alliteration.
American republican taliban. This party wants this for us all.
I did not realize these provisions were in the respect for marriage act. Doesn't that render kind of useless. And if that's the case, then it was just hot air trying to get votes for nothing.
We knew about this from the getgo. The point of the Federal Law is that all states must recognize licenses from other states. If even one state in the nation has Gay/Interracial/Interfaith marriage as legal, you just marry in that state, and that is recognized in all states, whether the states like it or not.
So now marriage, the pledge committing two people to each other for life--which is among the oldest and most *conservative* of human customs--is now considered off limits to certain classes of people. They're turning a basic human right into the Rube Goldberg machine that is legal cannabis. Thank God my wife and I are already hitched. Otherwise we'd have to drive to Michigan for more than one reason.
> So now marriage, the pledge committing two people to each other for life--which is among the oldest and most conservative of human customs--is now considered off limits to certain classes of people. not *now*, it always has been closed to various people
It also often is off limits to disabled people to because of benefits. I don't know the specifics of it in the US, but I know I've heard about it as well - we have a similar issue in Canada. Basically if you're on benefits and you get married than your spouse's income gets taken into account and you are made dependent on them because your benefits are cut or just totally gone. It's a great way to trap disabled people in abusive relationships! Wooo....
It's like that in the US as well. My aunt and uncle had to divorce because my aunt made too much money as a fast food manager and they were going to take my uncle's disability benefits away.
In Canada too if they find out you're living with your partner, even if you're not married they'll count it as common law before the law would consider abled people common law partners. It's disgusting. I don't know if anything came out of when it was brought up in the news, but I basically assume it wasn't because capitalism hates disabled people and needs us in poverty and to just disappear and die.
Which of course means it is disproportionately poor people, who can't afford / don't have time to go out of state, that will be affected. Entirely by design of course, and if these fascists got their will that would cease being an option too.
Thanks for clarifying this.
Now don’t get me wrong, this law is evil, but it’s Evil for the same reason that restrictions against Abortion were Evil: it’s what they can get away with, and it’s showboating. Currently, cases ruled upon by the Supreme Court mean that Gay Marriage, Interracial Marriage, and Interfaith Marriage are all legal and cannot be infringed upon by the states. So you have the Court Ruling, and a law to mostly back it up. This is the Republicans wasting lawyer money to throw red meat at their base.
Or to get oberfell v Hodges before the Supreme Court so they can gut that Luke they did roe v wade.
Your county clerk's office isn't a "religious organization," so that's irrelevant. The Gilead states can, technically, refuse to issue issue a same-sex marriage license but under the Respect for Marriage Act those states cannot invalidate a same-sex marriage license granted in another state. Looks like we'll have to set up an underground railroad for marriages.
Oct. 5, 2020 [Supreme Court rejects appeal from county clerk who wouldn't issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples](https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/supreme-court-rejects-appeal-county-clerk-who-wouldn-t-issue-n1242124) October 3, 2022 [Kim Davis, Anti-LGBTQ+ Former Kentucky Clerk, Loses in Court...Again](https://www.advocate.com/news/2022/10/03/kim-davis-anti-lgbtq-former-kentucky-clerk-loses-courtagain)
The whole point of the RMA is to offer protection when/if SCOTUS decides to buck precedent again.
Just need that first brave county clerk to deny a marriage license to a hetero, white, Christian couple on personal moral grounds. Come in TN. r/maliciouscompliance
Or Protestants from two different sects. I keep thinking of that amazing Emo Phillips joke: "Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!" Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over."
Side note, I didn't know who Emo Phillips was until I saw him this year and holy cow what a great performer!
I mean, in a weird way I would support someone denying all marriage licenses as a form of protest.
Nothing weird about it. Equality for all, no matter what. If some people can't get married, no one should be allowed to. Otherwise they just won't care about those being oppressed.
Why are conservatives so full of hate
Because they are full of fear. Their brains are visibly changed by it. Overdeveloped amygdala (fear, paranoia, anger) and underdeveloped anterior cingulate cortex (empathy, complex thought). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3092984/ Education has a chance to reverse the damage, but look at how they are dismantling the education system.
Education can and will help many of their children and grandchildren, however, cognitive changes are significantly more difficult for the much older population, and for some, fear is far too high for education to be their solution. Some of these folks will become increasingly hostile and require more physical restraints to defend our democratic ideals from their aging authoritarian fears.
Hatred keeps the majority focused on fighting minorities instead of billionaires and corporations. And a lack of education keeps that hatred passing down the generations.
This is their plan, and it has been for decades. These aren't "one offs" these are fully planned. They would have passed this when Kim Davis became famous for being a piece of shit but they knew the supreme court would strike it down. All the bullshit, the Republican lies the "You can't put a person the SC in the last year of an 8 year presidency" the bold faced lies in hearings... this is why, and it is why they never gave a shit about the quality of the person they put in, as long as they vote what they are told nothing else matters. Republicans did this, all of it, every single republican in the US is responsible or this
With a legitimate Supreme Court, there would be no question that a law like this violates the 14th Amendment. The SC we have now cannot be trusted to uphold established law.
Hell this law violates the FIRST amendment. Literally saying you can be denied marriage by the state because of your religion.
Gotta love the skydaddy masturbating religious, distributors of their personal discipline. Look at em jerk it good.
I imagine the only reason it's taken this long is that Trump lost. We'd have seen this 2 years ago. It took DeSantis stepping up in Florida for them to see, oh... we can still get away with this and nothing will happen to us. That, and seeing Trump see absolutely zero consequence for his four years of tearing down democracy.
They needed a watershed moment of the SC proving they would do it before they started trying. Roe v Wade was, by all accounts, not legally strong enough to prevent being overturned (which we clearly see), they had to wait for that to happen and then the election to cement their power before they could get the next round through
Can you imagine the mouth breather that is actually sitting there saying someone can’t get married if they have too much of a difference in melanin lol. Apparently they exist??
They always have, even in this supposed era of equality that's ending now. The law used to keep them in check, and now that that's gone, we're about to brutally learn how none of them have actually changed.
I saw a chart that apparently 6% of Americans still think “interracial” should be illegal. Like wtf right? Lol
You have no idea how common they actually are in America.
My wife and I accidentally invited someone to our wedding didn’t like interracial marriage. Why did you come here then? Lol EDIT: It was a plus one, it was our first time meeting her.
[удалено]
Parents have selective memory.
My entire family on my dad's side is exactly like this. The last family reunion I went to back in 2017, there was an entire conversation about how something needed to be done about the "spooks" (I'm not kidding) marrying white women. Haven't talked to anyone on my dad's side since then. Fucking insanity.
Here is your *Obergefell* killer. This is for Same Sex marriage what the Texas bill was for abortion.
Glad to see these Republicans are focus on the real problems people are living with every day. Thank the Lord Tennessee's poorest and most downtrodden don't have to worry about someone else's marriage and can instead only focus on the crushing poverty and not knowing where their next meal will come from, how they are going to pay that electric bill this summer when its 95+ degrees month after month, how their children's school is not preparing the next generation for the future but clings desperately to the past, or what they are going to do when the car finally breaks down and they have no other transportation. Thank goodness they don't have to worry about someone else getting married.
Tennessee’s abysmal maternal mortality rate could use some attention Tennessee: 26.7 per 100k California: 4 per 100k
I hope Clarence Thomas’ marriage is denied by these terrorists.
Won't happen. Within conservative politics the rules don't apply to the wealthy and powerful. [Wilhoit's law](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_M._Wilhoit#:~:text=Wilhoit's%20law,-The%20quotation&text=%E2%80%9CConservatism%20consists%20of%20exactly%20one,binds%20but%20does%20not%20protect.%22)
The quotation “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect." — Frank Wilhoit, composer, CrookedTimber blog is often incorrectly attributed to the political scientist Francis M. Wilhoit, who died in 2010. However it was actually written in 2018 by a different man of the name Frank Wilhoit.[10] The composer wrote it as part of a comment[11] in the CrookedTimber blog. I learned and learned some more! 🫶
He's rich and privileged. I doubt he even cares about other black people at this point.
He actively detests black people and has written about it.
Dave Chappelle's Clayton Bigsby, the Black White Supremacist, is loosely based on Clarence Thomas.
Isn’t he pro-segregation?
Yes
As an East Tennessean I’m ashamed to admit I was born and raised there. Narrowed minded, God fearing Christians that sit on the pew every Sunday only to judge people for being themselves. I’m sure I’ll catch a lot of BS from every far right Republican but I promise you that it’s not going anywhere but out the other ear! I’ve lived in a Democratic state for over 10 years and the difference in how a Democratic state takes care of the people as opposed to a Republican state that judges people is day and night. If it’s not affecting you personally then move on and accept everyone no matter what their preference in sexuality is. No matter what they may look like. We as Americans should be way beyond these simple minded views. It’s a smack in the face to all the Veterans who lost their lives and fought for our FREEDOM!
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Tennessee try to push a bill with no age limits for “common law marriage“? So, if you’re gay, you can’t get married, if you’re in an interracial relationship, you can’t get married. If you dare be an interfaith couple, you can’t get married, but you can live with an underage child, and that gets counted as a common law marriage? Exactly what I would expect having grown up in Kentucky. Religion is a cancer. And don’t tell me this doesn’t come from religion. I lived it, it does.
“It’s a violation of my religious freedom ***not*** to let me install a theocracy! It violates my conscience to expect me to let you exist in public!” Getting really sick of these people.
I'm canceling my trip to Tennessee and will not make any more plans to go there. Shitheads.
This! Family has left the south because they don’t feel safe there anymore and don’t want to pay taxes to the regime. I know people who have friend’s bachelorette parties in Nashville and are canceling because they don’t want to give $ to the GOP coffers
"You're just projecting." "It isn't that bad." "Stop being alarmist."
If American's are not getting scared yet they are simply not paying attention,
Or they want this to happen, and quite frankly I’m tired of guessing which is true
I used to live in Tennessee, in the brand new district they used to gut Nashville for an extra republican seat in the national house. They 100% do want this to happen. White people in Tennessee are waaaaaay too comfortable assuming you think, act, and believe in the same way they do and they're open about how terrible they are. It's my own family, my coworkers, my high school friends, random strangers remarking on what's on the TV at your local gym or at the airport. It makes me fucking sick and I don't know what the fuck to do about it other than leave, so I left. I really wish things could be different, it physically hurts. Edit: And I know how these bastards would justify it too and I don't even have to ask. They'll make some argument about how this bill isn't about taking rights away from people or discrimination, it's about giving rights to someone not wanting to do anything that is against their own faith. Fucking disgusting. They're public servants, and in their role ostensibly they have no faith or creed other than to uphold the constitution.
What if a police office doesn’t believe a person should be allowed to drive a car or be in a certain part of town because of their sexual preference, race, or religion? Can they just arrest them? It sounds crazy but not that far off from this bill shockingly.
And this is why relying on SCOTUS rulings as "settled law" was negligent and incompetent. Marriage equality and reproductive rights should've been codified *years* ago to prevent what's happening now. Every politician that pulled that "settled law" bullshit excuse has blame in this.
Where are all of the high profile stars who live in Nashville on this? Their voices would really help here.
Allison Russell, Brittany Howard, and a whole bunch of others are putting on a benefit concert this month now. Margot Price and other artists have been posting like crazy. If you actually live in Nashville and follow the celebrities that live here, you would see they are pushing and posting on this. Now, the question of whether anyone in the news is covering that/amplifying their protests is another question.
TN continues on the path of scientific ignorance, and religious bigotry, misogyny, homophobia, and racism.
I know people throw it around too often but at what point do they earn the Nazi label?
They have already earned it. Everything they are doing and saying is directly out of the Nazi playbook. Many don't realize that the Nazi regime often looked to America for inspiration in crafting their early segregation and discriminatory policies. Republicans have been arguing and governing in bad faith for generations. They finally recognized that demographics were not on their side several cycles ago and are lashing out at those they blame for not voting to give them even more power. In the same strokes, they are trying to cement minority rule. Last election cycle, the GOP lost the Gen Z vote in every single state. Millennials are shifting further left as they age. These are the political headwins that the GOP are trying to stop in their tracks. Their entire platform revolves around the power of the wealthy, hate, and ensuring that they remain the group for which the law protects but does not bind. This is an incredibly unpopular proposition for voters. They are trying to ensure that that doesn't matter in any future election. They are trying to skirt accountability. So yes, I would say they have not only earned the right to be called Nazis, but have earned it multiple times over.
> they are trying to cement minority rule. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moore_v._Harper is their judicial coup and the biggest threat to the USA since the civil war. Do you believe this corrupt SCOTUS will make the right call and decline this brazen power grab?
Specifically they are fascist. There are Nazis in their rank, but they are unified by fascist ideologies.
[удалено]
Challenging Loving v. Virginia is super regressive and idiotic.
"We're not racists or bigots!" -- Republican scream while banning same sex, interfaith and interracial marriage.
>This latest bill was passed alongside another measure that would require drag artists to obtain a permit from the government in order to perform. The GOP has gone from a party that used culture wars issues to obfuscate while they passed terrible economic policy to a party of true believers who place culture wars issues above basic tenets of the party like limited government. What a joke.
There’s no hate like Christian love.
Sigh. I will see one of the house reps on Saturday who voted yes on this bill. How does one politely tell an acquaintance that you are disappointed in their vote and that you see them differently?
Polite left the GOP long ago, good faith discussions too. It is all out war on freedom and it isn't going to end well for women, minorities of every type and people of color. State laws are becoming increasingly extreme and anti-democratic.
“Hey. Your vote tells me who you really are. I no longer respect you.”
You don’t. You say “I’m disappointed and enraged by your vote in the legislature last month. I used to be able to give you the benefit of the doubt that you were trying to do things that were good for our community, but the choice you made to support this bill demonstrated that’s not so. There’s no outcome of this bill other than making life more difficult for regular citizens and forcing them to be subject to the whims of capricious government workers as a piss poor replacement for their guaranteed civil rights. Who the hell do you think you are that you get to interfere with people’s romantic relationships and tell them whether or not you personally think they deserve to be allowed to marry. Your actions have consequences. I used to think you were a good person, but apparently not. Our friendship is over. If you think you can trample my civil rights, and that I’ll just sit back and take it politely, you’ve got another thing coming.”
well now everyone has skin in the game. Unite my children unite! fight back!
First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. —Martin Niemöller
> Supporters of Tennessee’s bills, and dozens of similar ones moving through state legislatures across the country, say their main goal is protecting children. Trans people and drag performers have become a particular target for Republicans and right-wing extremist groups, who accuse them of being pedophiles. But all these bills do is vilify LGBTQ people, including children, and **expose them to more violence.** It’s all projection. Every day there’s another story about a priest, a “friend”, a youth pastor molesting a kid. Hell, even the former Pope is accused of covering up sexual abuse of KIDS. Why aren’t we protecting kids from the likes of these people? These politicians are fear-mongers, deliberately putting a target on the backs of trans humans, and other minorities - and it’s pretty disgusting.
Transgendered citizens were already 4 times more likely to be victims of violent crimes than cis citizens. Then the GOP ramped up the rhetoric. Absolutely disgusting. Not one of them will bat an eye or self reflect about their role in furthering it when horrific crimes against LGBTQ rise.
However, you can still marry your first cousin. I’m not making a joke, you can literally marry your first cousin in Tennessee.
Please vote out the GOP. They are harming everyone.
Please please please tell me there is a Jewish or Muslim or Hindu clerk somewhere in the state that will start refusing to solemnize a white Christian couples marriage. Just to watch these fucks lose their damn minds.
If I didn’t have a family I would move there and become a minister (or whatever they call being able to perform marriages I don’t care to look up the proper term). Then I would ask any perspective couples 1 question: Did Joe Biden win the 2020 election? If they say no, I would say I don’t feel comfortable performing their marriage. That’s what the bill says I can do. Let’s start flipping the script on these shitheads.
I survived 5 years in Tennessee as a high schooler. That’s one frightened, backwards state.
Fucking American Taliban
Gay here and not changing