Posted on 04/25/2025 6:55:45 AM PDT by fwdude
Oklahoma State Senator Dusty Deevers, a evangelical pastor, said that the Supreme Court's Obergefell v. Hodges decision, which legalized same-sex marriage nationwide, is not "settled law," arguing that there is "no right to gay marriage."
Why It Matters
Deevers' comments come amid a broader conservative push in several red states to challenge the legal foundations of same-sex marriage. Conservative lawmakers in five states have introduced various measures encouraging the Supreme Court to strike down Obergefell v. Hodges, the landmark 2015 decision that established the nationwide right to same-sex marriage. Conservative Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have previously signaled in a court dissent that the case should be reconsidered.
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
What is interesting is that the Supreme Court ruled that marriage is a federal issue but yet I’ll bet if the Supreme Court later bans all same-sex marriages-the same liberals would reverse course and say that marriage is a state issue
I can’t agree with you more. Flame away, but NO woman has any business being on a court anywhere in a sane country, at any level. Not even as tokens in small numbers. They will screw up an opinion depending on whether it’s “that time of month” or not.
“I think of a man, and then I take away reason and accountability.”
even if Obergefell v. Hodges gets overturned, would SCOTUS also have to re-look at DOMA?
- Defense of Marriage Act - which denied federal recognition to same-sex marriages and allowed states to refuse to recognize such marriages performed in other states. It was ruled unconstitutional
The problem is what does the “to promote the general welfare” clause mean? Promoting good heterosexual marriage certainly falls under this. Much of current legislation does NOT help. From SS marriage to pro-homosexual education to tax laws to no-fault divorce, marriage has been under assault for over a hundred years. Now, Elon pointed out the other day, that we have unsustainable birth rates. Can Christianity rise to the challenge?
True but SCOTUS has bucked congressional legislation
Isn’t the only bona fide wall against judiciary branch constitutional amendments
With this seriously unprecedented lawfare we are seeing what the limits are
I’m not sure anyone knows honestly
Somebody educate me
Obergefell should be overturned and the decisions left to the states, the same as for Roe v Wade - because there’s nothing in the Constitution about either one of them.
And why is there nothing in the Constitution about either one of them you ask. Because in those days it was pretty much unthinkable for a woman to want to kill her baby and unthinkable for a man to want to marry another man.
Barrett was sold to us as the number 1 conservative female judge on the planet. Look at what we got. Another miserable America-hating liberal. Sure fooled us.
It didn’t take Barrett long to join the SCOTUS girls gone wild club.
That would be a whirlwind of confusion, but the most plausible outcome would be that state constitutional amendments on marriage would go back into full force.
ginsburg said roe v wade was weak sauce
Thomas has pointed out that obergefell is made from same weak sauce
i would welcome a reversal obergefell
if only to distract the gay lobby from the trans movement
the trans movement took off
once gay marriage is settled
One of the best lines in any movie.
Just came up on FNC. I.C.E. is charging another “Judge” in Wisconsin, “Hannah” something, for aiding and abetting an illegal alien criminal to evade I.C.E. agents who had to chase the perp down. She needs to resign. Another skank “judge”.
I know that DOMA would not be back in effect. I get it. But we are still stuck with that ruling - at the federal level.
Yours is the most probable outcome.
Actually, Lawrence needs to also be overturned. It was the impetus to all of this insane mess.
thanks again. interesting read here:
https://www.alhlaw.com/post/what-happens-if-obergefell-is-overturned
Overturning Obergefell v. Hodge would put same-sex marriage in the same legal situation as abortion. Some states forbid it and some allow it. The difference is that states are constitutionally required to recognize the ‘official acts’ of other states. Gays in MO could simply go to IL, get married and their marriage would have to be recognized by MO.
That was the problem in the years leading up to Obergefell v. Hodge. It only would take one state to legalize it (Hawaii?) before it would be imposed on all states. Congress did pass a law saying that marriage was restricted to only one man and one woman, but there is no way it would have survived court challenge.
Sorry, but the ship has sailed. There are lots of other ships that need to be stopped.
Who are you to say which ships are worth stopping?
Some cargo on ships is pivotal to everything else. This is one of them.
Some cargo on ships is pivotal to everything else. This is one of them.
I’d venture to guess we’d pretty much agree on which ships must not be allowed to sail. Devoting too much energy on trying to bring back the OvH ship would only strengthen the other side, IMHO. ‘Republicans want to overturn gay marriage!!’ won’t rally too many to our side but it will to theirs.
On the other hand, stopping the acceptance of pedophilia, men pretending to women, and say the legalization of polygamy/polyandry will draw the sane to our side.
*I* do not have to recognize same sex marriage, and neither does anyone else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.