Marriage

Subterms

    Latest story

    113 Shares119 Views

    Tennessee legislature passes bill banning marriage between first cousins

    by

    The Republican-led Tennessee legislature has overwhelmingly voted to send the Republican governor, Bill Lee, a proposal that would ban marriage between first cousins.The statehouse cast a 75-2 vote on Thursday on the bill after the senate previously approved it without any opposition.A particularly vocal opponent, the Republican representative Gino Bulso, took up most of the debate time, as he argued for an amendment to allow first-cousin marriages if the couple first seeks counseling from a genetic counselor.In a previous committee hearing on the bill, Bulso lightheartedly shared a story about how his grandparents had been first cousins who came to the US from Italy in the 1920s, then traveled from Ohio to Tennessee to get married. He and other lawmakers laughed, and Bulso voted for the bill in that committee.Then, during Thursday’s floor debate, the socially conservative attorney argued that the risk of married cousins having a child with birth defects does not exist for gay couples. He contended there was no compelling government interest to ban same-sex cousins from getting married, saying that would run afoul of the US supreme court’s gay marriage decision.He also couched his argument by saying that he thought the supreme court decision on gay marriage was “grievously wrong”. Bulso has supported legislation aimed at the LGBTQ+ community, including a bill he is sponsoring that would largely ban displaying Pride flags in public school classrooms, which civil liberties advocates have contended runs afoul of the US constitution.“The question is: is there a public health issue with a male marrying a male first cousin?” Bulso said. “And I think the answer is no.”Ultimately, lawmakers voted down Bulso’s amendment and approved the ban proposed by the Democratic representative Darren Jernigan.“I hope it’s safe to say that in 2024, we can close this loophole,” Jernigan said.Jernigan said a 1960 attorney general’s opinion determined that an 1820s Tennessee law restricting some marriages among relatives does not prevent first cousins from marrying. He responded to Bulso that there was no violation to the gay marriage ruling in his bill.Monty Fritts, a Republican representative, was the other lawmaker to vote against the bill. More

    More stories

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Same-sex marriage legislation clears key US Senate hurdle with Republican support

      by

      Same-sex marriage legislation clears key US Senate hurdle with Republican supportTwelve Republicans voted with all Democrats to advance the bill, which would ensure same-sex unions are enshrined in federal law Legislation to protect same-sex and interracial marriages crossed a major Senate hurdle on Wednesday, putting Congress on track to take the historic step of ensuring that such unions are enshrined in federal law.Twelve Republicans voted with all Democrats to move forward on the legislation, meaning a final vote could come as soon as this week, or later this month. Chuck Schumer, the Senate majority leader, said the bill ensuring the unions are legally recognized under the law is a chance for the Senate to “live up to its highest ideals” and protect marriage equality for all people.“It will make our country a better, fairer place to live,” Schumer said, noting that his own daughter and her wife are expecting a baby next year.Senate Democrats are quickly moving to pass the bill while the party still controls the House. Republicans are on the verge of winning the House majority and would be unlikely to take up the issue next year.The bill has gained steady momentum since the supreme court’s June decision that overturned Roe v Wade and the federal right to an abortion. An opinion at that time from Justice Clarence Thomas suggested that an earlier high court decision protecting same-sex marriage could also come under threat.The legislation would repeal the Clinton-era Defense of Marriage Act and require states to recognize all marriages that were legal where they were performed. The new Respect for Marriage Act would also protect interracial marriages by requiring states to recognize legal marriages regardless of “sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin”.Congress has been moving to protect same-sex marriage as support from the general public – and from Republicans in particular – has sharply grown in recent years, as the supreme court’s 2015 Obergefell v Hodges decision legalized gay marriage nationwide. Recent polling has found more than two-thirds of the public supports same-sex unions.Still, many Republicans in Congress have been reluctant to support the legislation. Democrats delayed consideration until after the midterm elections, hoping that would relieve political pressure on some GOP senators who might be wavering.A proposed amendment to the bill, negotiated by supporters to bring more Republicans on board, would clarify that it does not affect rights of private individuals or businesses that are already enshrined in law. Another tweak would make clear that a marriage is between two people, an effort to ward off some far-right criticism that the legislation could endorse polygamy.Three Republicans said early on that they would support the legislation and have lobbied their GOP colleagues to support it: Maine Senator Susan Collins, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis and Ohio Senator Rob Portman.“Current federal law doesn’t reflect the will or beliefs of the American people in this regard,” Portman said ahead of the vote. “It’s time for the Senate to settle the issue.”The growing GOP support for the issue is a sharp contrast from even a decade ago, when many Republicans vocally opposed same-sex marriages. The legislation passed the House in a July vote with the support of 47 Republicans – a larger-than-expected number that gave the measure a boost in the Senate.On Tuesday, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints became the most recent conservative-leaning group to back the legislation. In a statement, the Utah-based faith said church doctrine would continue to consider same-sex relationships to be against God’s commandments, but it would support rights for same-sex couples as long as they didn’t infringe upon religious groups’ right to believe as they choose.Wisconsin Senator Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat who is the first openly gay senator and has been working on gay rights issues for almost four decades, said the newfound openness from many Republicans on the subject reminds her “of the arc of the LBGTQ movement to begin with, in the early days when people weren’t out and people knew gay people by myths and stereotypes”.Baldwin said that as more individuals and families have become visible, hearts and minds have changed.TopicsSame-sex marriage (US)LGBTQ+ rightsUS politicsMarriagenewsReuse this content More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      US House passes bill to protect right to same-sex and interracial marriage

      by

      US House passes bill to protect right to same-sex and interracial marriageThe measure, partly a political strategy, forced Democrats and Republicans to record their view, and garnered bipartisan support The US House has passed a bill protecting the right to same-sex and interracial marriages, a vote that comes amid concerns that the supreme court’s overturning of Roe v Wade could jeopardize other rights.Forty-seven House Republicans supported the legislation, called the Respect for Marriage Act, including some who have publicly apologized for their past opposition to gay marriage. But more than three-quarters of House Republicans voted against the bill, with some claiming it was a “political charade”.All 220 House Democrats supported the bill, which is expected to be blocked by Republican opposition in a politically divided Senate.Kamala Harris urges voters to elect a ‘pro-choice Congress’ in midtermsRead moreSame-sex marriage has majority support in the United States, including support from majorities of both Republican and Democratic voters. In opposing the bill, Republican politicians in both the House and Senate have claimed that the legislation is mere political posturing from Democrats and that same-sex and interracial marriages are not actually under attack.“We are here for a political charade, we are here for political messaging,” said congressman Jim Jordan of Ohio, the top Republican on the judiciary committee, who voted against the Respect for Marriage Act.“I’m probably not inclined to support it,” Senator Josh Hawley of Missouri, said of the bill. “The predicate of this is just wrong. I don’t think the supreme court is going to overturn any of that stuff.”“I don’t see anything behind this right now other than, you know, election year politics,” said the GOP Senate whip, Senator John Thune of South Dakota.The Respect for Marriage Act would repeal a law from the Clinton era that defines marriage as a heterogeneous relationship between a man and a woman. It would also provide legal protections for interracial marriages by prohibiting any state from denying out-of-state marriage licenses and benefits on the basis of sex, race, ethnicity or national origin.The 1996 law, the Defense of Marriage Act, had basically been sidelined by Obama-era court rulings, including the supreme court case Obergefell v Hodges, which established the rights of same-sex couples to marry nationwide, a landmark case for gay rights.But last month, writing for the majority in overturning Roe v Wade, Justice Samuel Alito argued for a more narrow interpretation of the rights guaranteed to Americans, noting that the right to an abortion was not spelled out in the Constitution.In a concurring opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas went further, saying other rulings similar to Roe, including those around same-sex marriage and the right for couples to use contraception, should be reconsidered.While Alito insisted in the majority opinion that “this decision concerns the constitutional right to abortion and no other right”, others have taken notice. Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz said over the weekend that the supreme court’s decision protecting marriage equality was “clearly wrong” and state legislatures should visit the issue.Activists who fought to secure same sex marriage rights have said the current moment should be taken seriously. Jim Obergefell, the plaintiff in the landmark ruling legalizing same-sex marriage and now running as a Democrat for the Ohio House, said after the court’s ruling on abortion: “When we lose one right that we have relied on and enjoyed, other rights are at risk.”House Democrats argued that the Respect for Marriage Act is necessary to enshrine equal marriage rights into law and to protect all Americans from a conservative-dominated supreme court with an ideology that is starkly out-of-step with majority of the American public, and a demonstrated appetite for upending settled law.A Gallup poll in June showed broad and increasing support for same-sex marriage, with 70% of US adults saying they think such unions should be recognized by law as valid. The poll showed majority support among both Democrats (83%) and Republicans (55%).“For me, this is personal,” said congressman Mondaire Jones of New York, who said he was among nine openly gay members of the House.“Imagine telling the next generation of Americans, my generation, we no longer have the right to marry,” he said. “Congress can’t allow that to happen.”There were “Yes” votes from Republican legislators in North Dakota, Nebraska, Idaho and Utah. Wyoming Republican Liz Cheney, who in 2021 publicly apologized for her past opposition to same-sex marriage, was one of the Republicans who voted in favor of the Respect for Marriage Act. Cheney’s sister, Mary Cheney, who is married to a woman, had publicly rebuked her for her stance.“If gay couples want to be as happily or miserably married as straight couples, more power to them,” said the South Carolina Republican Nancy Mace in a statement about her support.In a notable silence, Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell declined to express his view on the bill, leaving an open question over how strongly his party would fight it. Democratic Senate majority leader Chuck Schumer did not commit to holding a vote on the bill.The Associated Press contributed reporting. TopicsUS newsMarriageSame-sex marriage (US)US CongressLGBT rightsUS politicsnewsReuse this content More