Adam and Steve- Here we go again

Here we go again. The decision to repeal Roe is opening up the door to examining all decisions involving a “right to privacy” stemming from the 14th amendment.

Clarence Thomas spelled out what decisions could be reexamined-

Griswold- the right to contraception

Lawrence- the right to sodomy (which means the right to be gay)

Obergefell- the right to gay marriage.

The House just passed a bill to secure the right for gay people to marry 267-157 with 47 republicans joining all the democrats. Now it goes to the Senate where it is less sure to meet the 60 vote threshold. We shall see.

Looks like we will relitigate this issue that most had thought was done. I mean- has the world ended after gay marriage was allowed federally? Do you seriously want to roll back rights for gay folks? Why?

1 Like

To feel powerful and superior.

Why wouldn’t republicans in Congress support gay marriage?

What’s the problem?

If you want it to be a right, make it a right.


What rights?

The fundamental right to marry.

Is there a “right” in the US Constitution that guarantees homosexuality or a homosexual lifestyle?
Why should Congress be tasked with legislating a lifestyle choice?


Doesn’t exist. It’s not the “right to marry”, it’s state recognition of the union.

If you want it to be a right, make it a right. Pass an amendment, then you won’t have to worry about.

Hell, I’ll vote for it just to stop the whining.


Democrats established that the governments can outlaw going to church, peacefully assembling, speaking to a crowd, etc. based on plausible health concerns even though these rights are specifically protected in the constitution.

The government can require employees to get vaccinated. Bodily autonomy is not an absolute right.

Sexual behaviors spread disease. That is a health issue, that the government should be able to regulate.

The fertility rate is far below replacement. That is a long-term threat to national security and the economy of the country. The government should be able to take measures to encourage larger families.

Questions about exactly what the laws are should be left to the states.


Making up rights again are we?


What do you think would happen if you passed an amendment?

So lesbians are cool then.

How would this procreate for the motherland policy be implemented?

No, the SCOTUS did. @Sknyluv is not wrong and I understand the frustration.

Hot ones, very.

1 Like

I thought we are in danger of being overpopulated because of the invasion on our southern border?

1 Like

The Supreme Court decreed that it was a right - until they flip-flopped 50 years later. Because of that everyone less than about 45 years old knows it as a right that was yanked away, for the first time in history.

I don’t disagree. But the SCOTUS decreed is not how we get rights. If you want it to be a right, you have to do it correctly. And now you know why.

And then the SCOTUS can uphold it.

Roe was bad law. Make a good law that isn’t subject to who is wearing the bathrobe.


You just clearly identified the problem. Now solve it.

Promiscuous sex is dangerous on multiple levels.

Fatherless families are associated with a wide range of problems.

The government should be supporting stable families, not doing everything it can to destroy them.

Gay people are not the only ones who engage in oral sex.

How does the fact that gay people want to enter into stable and legally protected relationships destroy families?