[ChicagoConservative27]

Government doesn't need to be involved in marriage.. this is just to get their loony left base to the polls.

[rktman]

More targets, uh, I mean children available for adoption?

[Eleutheria5]

World ends at ten, women and LBGTQRSTUV expected to be hardest hit. Details at 11. Get a shovel—no, a back-hoe.

[Sacajaweau]

How did the Feds get involved in marriage and all this gender cr**. Men in ladies room...Trannies in the Library...

What a mess. Just tell them to stay out of other peoples' lives.

LEAVE US ALONE...Be whatever you think you are....on YOUR time.

[Oldeconomybuyer]

How Roe v. Wade’s reversal could effect toenail polish availability

[Salman]

NEWS FLASH: The sodomites manage to make this issue all about themselves.

[bert]

Well, it will not change the thrust of the General’s observation “the only good queer is a dead queer”

[Gnome1949]

They already have mental health problems as society’s freaks.

[beethovenfan]

AFFECT

[DoodleDawg]

Government doesn't need to be involved in marriage.. this is just to get their loony left base to the polls.

The government did. Don't think for a moment that there won't be challenges to Obergfell.

[ReaganGeneration2]

Tried to read the article, but it was Greek to me.

I suspect these geniuses missed how this will really “effect” LGTQ’s:
* Outlawed abortions = more adoptions for sodomites who can’t reproduce

[Wuli]

The Constitutional references in the “gay” marriage decision did not rely on the penumbras and emanations dreamed up by the majority in the Roe decision. The “activists” who claim many other supreme court decisions could now be reversed based on the decision likely to overturn Roe have either not read Justice Alito’s decion or did not understand what Alito said. He made it clear (he very carefully weighed how to revoke Roe and Roe alone) how the reasoning revoking Roe does not extend to any other former SCOTUS decisions.

But even knowing that will not stop the fearmongers on the Left, as fear is always their fundraising and organizing calling card.

[whitney69]

“Government doesn’t need to be involved in marriage...”

And marriage is nothing more than a contract for business purposes. It has nothing to do with love or procreation. It is there for business commitment, worth and legal possession and the first recorded evidence of marriage ceremonies uniting one woman and one man dates from about 2350 B.C., in Mesopotamia. So the marriage contract has only been around for just over 4000 years. There have been people on earth, anatomically modern Homo sapiens, that evolved around 300,000 years ago. So the answer of what was before sliced bread is nothing and it as editable.

wy69

[whitney69]

“The possibility that the Supreme Court will overturn Roe v. Wade has set off alarm bells in the LGBT community.”

LGBT? Fascinating assumption here. But the liberals still haven’t figured out that two people of the same sex cannot conceive. So the privilege of abortion is being transferred to a right of choice when a life is in the balance.

I watched Adam Chit make a statement on CSPAN yesterday saying the a white politician shouldn’t be making a decision for life or death for a person in Missouri? Just by bringing it up he is creating a racial divide and not anything to do with the topic of abortion, doesn’t that make him a racist?

And his only other demeaning comment about the bill they passed was that there was nothing in the bill about incest or rape. So, if that is added to the bill, is the bill okay now and abortion cannot be on command as it is now?

wy69

[imabadboy99]

Maybe women will stop being so promiscuous and engaging in ‘hookup’ culture if Roe is overturned. Huge problem finding a decent woman for my generation b/c of the vast number of young women who sleep around then want to settle down after their party days are over.

[bobbo666]

Could be some merit to the point.

After all, the “rights” found in crafting RvW are made up. They do not exist in the Const.
So, if some rights can be made up, others can, too.

Regardless, if your right does not exist, then try another argument. Or, would that require some version of rational thought, and you are incapable of that?

[Sooth2222]

In recent years, people have been having less (normosexual) sex and so there have been fewer abortions in recent years.

The people protesting are in big blue states and places where the odds of any new laws restricting abortion (New York, New Jersey, DC, Maryland, Massachusetts, California) are at absolute zero.

(Looking at the protesters, there is an absolute zero chance that most of them would ever need an abortion, either.)

I'm awaiting "How the overturn of Roe v. Wade is responsible for [insert every single failure of the Biden administration, from border insecurity to WW III]".)

[Mariner]

The left wants to conflate abortion with homo marriage.

Abortion had NO legal basis.

Homo marriage is based on Equal Protection, sound legal footing.

For those who say homos already have equal right to marry somebody of the opposite sex, they should look at that very narrow perspective through the lens of interracial marriage.

Should we outlaw interracial marriage too?

[JimRed]

Queers can’t breed, so abortion should be the least of their concerns!

[Allegra]

I find myself not really caring about how things “affect the LGBT community.”

[libertylover]

The Supreme Court ruling that pretends that homosexuality is normal should be overturned the same as Roe v. Wade and for the same reason: there nothing in the Constitution about it and should return to the states.

And why is there nothing in the Constitution about either one? Because in those days the idea that a woman would want to kill her baby was unthinkable and thus did not require an entry in the Constitution.

The idea that a man would want to ... was also unthinkable.