Anti-LGBTQ Group: Overturning Marriage Equality is Now “Clearly Within Sight” October 16, 2020

Anti-LGBTQ Group: Overturning Marriage Equality is Now “Clearly Within Sight”

If Amy Coney Barrett is confirmed to the Supreme Court, it’s beyond apparent at this point that long standing precedents will be overturned, at least in practice if not in law. Abortion rights will be severely curtailed, voter suppression will continue, and “religious freedom” will always win out over LGBTQ rights.

Even marriage equality is on the chopping block — and even if Barrett won’t say that out loud, one anti-equality organization feels very optimistic about the future.

The National Organization for Marriage sent a message to supporters urging them to support Barrett’s confirmation because it would lead to the overturning of same-sex marriage.

When the US Supreme Court illegitimately redefined marriage in 2015 with their anti-constitutional ruling in the Obergefell case, NOM vowed to work every day to overturn that decision. People said we were crazy to think that was possible. We were mocked and ridiculed by LGBT activists for even suggesting that the Supreme Court would ever reverse their ruling imposing gay ‘marriage.’ Regardless, NOM pressed on and now the supposedly unthinkable is clearly within sight.

They don’t think we’re crazy any longer.

That last line is up for debate.

Even if you believe that same-sex marriages are sinful, it’s not hard to understand how disastrous it would be to families (kids!) nationwide if those marriages were severed by the government. Overturning marriage equality could mean that adoptive gay parents lose custody of children they may have raised since birth. It could prevent people from visiting their loved ones in a hospital — a problem that was very much real before the Obergefell ruling.

Overturning marriage equality could mean same-sex partners losing health care coverage through their partner’s insurance, which could be even more devastating if one partner is dependent on the other for coverage of insulin, chemotherapy, or COVID care. It could mean their partner is no longer able to make medical decisions on their behalf if they are incapacitated. It could mean not inheriting social security benefits.

You would think the people who routinely claim to support “family values” would be less eager to break those families apart, yet here they are boasting about the possibility.

SCOTUS has the responsibility to make decisions that benefit Americans. That’s about to end.

(Screenshot via YouTube)

"The way republican politics are going these days, that means the winner is worse than ..."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."
"It would have been more convincing if he used then rather than than."

It’s Moving Day for the Friendly ..."

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!