Summary
Conservative lawmakers and activists are pushing to overturn Obergefell v. Hodges, the 2015 Supreme Court ruling legalizing same-sex marriage. Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver declared, “It’s just a matter of when.”
Some legislators, like Oklahoma Senator David Bullard, are introducing bills to challenge the ruling, while Justices Thomas and Alito have signaled interest in reconsidering it.
Though most Americans support same-sex marriage, the court’s conservative shift is concerning.
The 2022 Respect for Marriage Act ensures federal recognition but does not prevent states from restricting same-sex marriage if Obergefell is overturned.
Because of context. Look at where we are having this conversation.
This is a thread that started in your response to my comment about queer erasure in the current administration. Which is running project 2025’s playbook I know adoption isn’t 100% good. It is nuanced though. And the intention of the language in project 2025 is to ban it, to hurt queer families. And a lot of other people will be hurt because of it too.
Again, context.
And I’m not against regulation. Don’t mistake being an anarchist for being a libertarian.
You’re right to swing your fist ends where it hits my face. And that goes basically for all property ownership, because it leads to climate change, pollution, extracting resources from the Earth and killing most of the life on this planet.
Accumulation of wealth is a type of authoritarianism too. Power and coercion over others. And I’m quite aware of how the current world order abuses wealth, and people’s lack of wealth, to do things like extract babies from poor countries.
And yes, I believe that sort of coercion should be stopped. And I believe the most skillful way to stop it is communism, and to end capitalism.
But that’s not what I was referring to when you came in with your whole argument against adoption.
I was referring to my god-given right to make a baby and give it to my friends and allow them to raise it.
If you think coercive of forms of adoption should be banned, I’m right there with you. But that wasn’t the conversation I was having when you walked in.
So again context.
If you care about queer people, quit distracting from the issues.
This is not a distraction; this is in my mind a serious issue of similar weight to queer rights. I think there are a similar number of people who have been coerced into giving up a child for adoption as there are queer people, within an order of magnitude at least. It’s like you’re saying “stop whining about class warfare, it’s distracting from queer rights.”
If the context of the post this is under is distracting you from the issue of adoption rights, feel free to start a thread in another post and ping me. My point was not a top-level comment though.