Dems Force Republicans To Fix Its Own Anti-Gay Marriage Bill?? WTF??

[Biff_Poindexter]

Tennessee legislator files amendment to anti-LGBT marriage bill amid age limit backlash

Amid the backlash, Senate sponsors Tuesday afternoon added a brief amendment specifying a couple seeking a marriage certificate must meet the age of majority.

www.tennessean.com

"A Tennessee bill to exclude same-sex couples from a proposed legal marriage contract process sparked widespread backlash after sponsors initially failed to include a minimum age limit in the legislation. Widespread public outcry spread Tuesday over child welfare concerns, as critics said a pathway to marriage without minimum age limits relaxes guardrails to protect minors from predatory behavior and abuse.

Sponsors of the legislation have now added amendments specifying a man and woman seeking the contract must have "attained the age of majority," which is 18 in Tennessee. "This one took a sideways turn on the folks that submitted the bill in a way I don't think they anticipated,” said Regina Lambert Hillman, a University of Memphis law professor. Seven years since the marriage equality victory, Hillman said it's disappointing to see continual efforts to roll back progress made for LGBTQ rights."




"Leatherwood maintained Wednesday he had no intentions of opening up the contract process to minors and the age limit amendment would only strengthen the bill <<<---Riiigggghhhttt


Question remains; why are Republicans allowing the Dems to force them to fix their own bills? Why bow down to the pressure of the woke-left-Communist-Satanic-LGBTQ-mob and add age restrictions to your anti-gay marriage bill?? You are only bringing more negative attention to it and making it seem like you didn't add age restrictions for grooming reasons...when we all know the Dems are pro-pedo and pro-groomers......

Now because of this display of weakness, you will have folks bringing up other Tennessee republicans and their propensity for grooming....like Tennessee Congressman John Rose....who met his wife and started dating her when she was 16 years old.....then married her at 19...but hey, it's unfair to say he was "grooming" her when she was 16....since he isn't gay or some tranny or anything.....but still, it's bad optics when you are trying to accuse your opponents of being child sex trafficking pedophiles....like, now they will bring up the fact that Republican legislatures after Republican legislature have been historically pro-grooming...like how Idaho republicans voted against ending their state's child marriage laws....

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article226944034.html

Or how it took a "Democrat" and even worse than that, a black woman Democrat to help end child marriage in Republican controlled Arkansas......

Rep. Vivian Flowers Helps End Child Marriage In Arkansas

A new law banning child marriage in Arkansas has officially been signed into effect. Democratic state Rep. Vivian Flowers of Pine Bluff championed the cause, recognizing that protecting our children is among the most fundamental of our state's responsibilities. For too long pregnancy has been...

www.arkdems.org

How can we paint all black women Libs as being pro-pedophile if they are on record trying to end child marriage laws in Republican controlled states??

 

[DGS49]

It is a made-up, nonsense issue. One cannot sign any binding legal contract until you have reached the age of majority.

Not sure I understand the purpose of the law - what rights "contracted" couples have vis a vis "married" couples, but that's not the issue here.

 

[Auld Phart]

Tennessee legislator files amendment to anti-LGBT marriage bill amid age limit backlash

Amid the backlash, Senate sponsors Tuesday afternoon added a brief amendment specifying a couple seeking a marriage certificate must meet the age of majority.

www.tennessean.com

"A Tennessee bill to exclude same-sex couples from a proposed legal marriage contract process sparked widespread backlash after sponsors initially failed to include a minimum age limit in the legislation. Widespread public outcry spread Tuesday over child welfare concerns, as critics said a pathway to marriage without minimum age limits relaxes guardrails to protect minors from predatory behavior and abuse.

Sponsors of the legislation have now added amendments specifying a man and woman seeking the contract must have "attained the age of majority," which is 18 in Tennessee. "This one took a sideways turn on the folks that submitted the bill in a way I don't think they anticipated,” said Regina Lambert Hillman, a University of Memphis law professor. Seven years since the marriage equality victory, Hillman said it's disappointing to see continual efforts to roll back progress made for LGBTQ rights."




"Leatherwood maintained Wednesday he had no intentions of opening up the contract process to minors and the age limit amendment would only strengthen the bill <<<---Riiigggghhhttt
View attachment 627297

Question remains; why are Republicans allowing the Dems to force them to fix their own bills? Why bow down to the pressure of the woke-left-Communist-Satanic-LGBTQ-mob and add age restrictions to your anti-gay marriage bill?? You are only bringing more negative attention to it and making it seem like you didn't add age restrictions for grooming reasons...when we all know the Dems are pro-pedo and pro-groomers......

Now because of this display of weakness, you will have folks bringing up other Tennessee republicans and their propensity for grooming....like Tennessee Congressman John Rose....who met his wife and started dating her when she was 16 years old.....then married her at 19...but hey, it's unfair to say he was "grooming" her when she was 16....since he isn't gay or some tranny or anything.....but still, it's bad optics when you are trying to accuse your opponents of being child sex trafficking pedophiles....like, now they will bring up the fact that Republican legislatures after Republican legislature have been historically pro-grooming...like how Idaho republicans voted against ending their state's child marriage laws....

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article226944034.html

Or how it took a "Democrat" and even worse than that, a black woman Democrat to help end child marriage in Republican controlled Arkansas......

Rep. Vivian Flowers Helps End Child Marriage In Arkansas

A new law banning child marriage in Arkansas has officially been signed into effect. Democratic state Rep. Vivian Flowers of Pine Bluff championed the cause, recognizing that protecting our children is among the most fundamental of our state's responsibilities. For too long pregnancy has been...

www.arkdems.org

How can we paint all black women Libs as being pro-pedophile if they are on record trying to end child marriage laws in Republican controlled states??

State law is already 16-17, minimum, with 2 guardians signing for them.

How would this bill overrule that?

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

It is a made-up, nonsense issue. One cannot sign any binding legal contract until you have reached the age of majority.

Not sure I understand the purpose of the law - what rights "contracted" couples have vis a vis "married" couples, but that's not the issue here.

The purpose of the law is homophobia...

In other words, Republicans know they can excite their base voter with homophobia....period....

Because other than the homophobia, xenophobia and dog-whistle racism -- they really don't have any policies that motivates their base

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

State law is already 16-17, minimum, with 2 guardians signing for them.

How would this bill overrule that?

So why is the bill needed??

There is already a marriage law in the state....

 

[rightwinger]

The purpose of the law is homophobia...

In other words, Republicans know they can excite their base voter with homophobia....period....

Because other than the homophobia, xenophobia and dog-whistle racism -- they really don't have any policies that motivates their base

They are playing to the base

They know the bill will never survive a court challenge

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Tennessee legislator files amendment to anti-LGBT marriage bill amid age limit backlash

Amid the backlash, Senate sponsors Tuesday afternoon added a brief amendment specifying a couple seeking a marriage certificate must meet the age of majority.

www.tennessean.com

"A Tennessee bill to exclude same-sex couples from a proposed legal marriage contract process sparked widespread backlash after sponsors initially failed to include a minimum age limit in the legislation. Widespread public outcry spread Tuesday over child welfare concerns, as critics said a pathway to marriage without minimum age limits relaxes guardrails to protect minors from predatory behavior and abuse.

Sponsors of the legislation have now added amendments specifying a man and woman seeking the contract must have "attained the age of majority," which is 18 in Tennessee. "This one took a sideways turn on the folks that submitted the bill in a way I don't think they anticipated,” said Regina Lambert Hillman, a University of Memphis law professor. Seven years since the marriage equality victory, Hillman said it's disappointing to see continual efforts to roll back progress made for LGBTQ rights."




"Leatherwood maintained Wednesday he had no intentions of opening up the contract process to minors and the age limit amendment would only strengthen the bill <<<---Riiigggghhhttt
View attachment 627297

Question remains; why are Republicans allowing the Dems to force them to fix their own bills? Why bow down to the pressure of the woke-left-Communist-Satanic-LGBTQ-mob and add age restrictions to your anti-gay marriage bill?? You are only bringing more negative attention to it and making it seem like you didn't add age restrictions for grooming reasons...when we all know the Dems are pro-pedo and pro-groomers......

Now because of this display of weakness, you will have folks bringing up other Tennessee republicans and their propensity for grooming....like Tennessee Congressman John Rose....who met his wife and started dating her when she was 16 years old.....then married her at 19...but hey, it's unfair to say he was "grooming" her when she was 16....since he isn't gay or some tranny or anything.....but still, it's bad optics when you are trying to accuse your opponents of being child sex trafficking pedophiles....like, now they will bring up the fact that Republican legislatures after Republican legislature have been historically pro-grooming...like how Idaho republicans voted against ending their state's child marriage laws....

https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article226944034.html

Or how it took a "Democrat" and even worse than that, a black woman Democrat to help end child marriage in Republican controlled Arkansas......

Rep. Vivian Flowers Helps End Child Marriage In Arkansas

A new law banning child marriage in Arkansas has officially been signed into effect. Democratic state Rep. Vivian Flowers of Pine Bluff championed the cause, recognizing that protecting our children is among the most fundamental of our state's responsibilities. For too long pregnancy has been...

www.arkdems.org

How can we paint all black women Libs as being pro-pedophile if they are on record trying to end child marriage laws in Republican controlled states??

All of this hysterical grooming and pedophilia finger pointing bullshit over what was apparently an oversight just obfuscates the stupidity of the Republicans and the bill itself. Those fucking hillbillies need to just stop this shit.

This law is going no place fact. If passed it will immediately appealed in Federal Court. Both the District court and the Appeals court will have no choice but to rule it unconstitutional because it clearly runs afoul of Obergefell. If appealed to SCOTIS, it will most likely be dismissed without comment allowing the lower courts ruling to stand .That's what happened last year when there was an attempt to overturn Obergefell on religious liberty grounds, even after Kennedy retired and Ginsberg died

In addition, it is not clear what this would accomplish in that it apparently does not over ride existing marriage law under which gays can me married.

Lastly, there are questions as to the validity of these "contracts" in terms of who would be required to recognize them, such as the Federal Government, or employers for the purpose of benefits .

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Additional Information

Tennessee Lawmakers Mull Bill To Separate Gay And Straight Marriages

The legislation initially attracted criticism because it would have eliminated the age minimum for marriage, opening the door to child abuse.

www.huffpost.com

“Simply calling it common law marriage does not change the fact that they are creating a ‘separate but supposedly equal’ alternative, which violates the Obergefell constitutional requirement that same-sex couples receive all the same benefits of marriage.”

“First of all, simply calling it common law marriage does not change the fact that they are creating a ‘separate but supposedly equal’ alternative, which violates the Obergefell constitutional requirement that same-sex couples receive all the same benefits of marriage,” Rubenfeld wrote in an email.
“I already have our legal team back together and ready to challenge this discriminatory law as well ― and that will again waste millions in taxpayer funds when we win and collect our fees,” she said.

While Leatherwood’s proposal would not change whether gay couples could get married in Tennessee ― they still could ― it would enact a state-sanctioned division between straight marriages and gay marriages on the basis of certain people’s religious beliefs. Instead of a license, straight couples could ask for a special certificate.

So if I'm reading this correctly, same sex couples would still be able to marry under existing law. The difference is that heterosexual couples who do not like the idea that gay people can have the same kind of marriage as they do can now choose a different form of marriage to differentiate themselves from gay marriage.

They might be shocked when they find out that their common law marriage is legally inferior to existing marriage laws. It does not get much more stupid that this

 

[Tom Paine 1949]

This law is going no place fact. If passed it will immediately appealed in Federal Court. Both the District court and the Appeals court will have no choice but to rule it unconstitutional because it clearly runs afoul of Obergefell. If appealed to SCOTIS, it will most likely be dismissed without comment allowing the lower courts ruling to stand .That's what happened last year when there was an attempt to overturn Obergefell on religious liberty grounds, even after Kennedy retired and Ginsberg died…

Respectfully, I think that — unfortunately — Obergefell is now seriously threatened by this 6-3 Republican / Conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court. I hope I am wrong.

It seems to me, especially if Trump (or perhaps Pompeo) wins the Presidency and Republicans control Congress in 2024, there will be much willingness to follow up Justice Thomas’ suggestion in his concurring opinion repudiating Roe that the Supreme Court “should reconsider all of this Court’s substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell.” I thought this Politico article made sense:

Justice Thomas: SCOTUS ‘should reconsider’ contraception, same-sex marriage rulings

Outside of individual state laws (which may stand if they do not refuse to recognize out-of-state gay marriages) there is a rising threat that a Federal Law may be put forward and passed in Congress to outlaw abortion and gay marriage. Like in Poland or Hungary, should a new Christian “Moral Majority” in alliance with MAGA authoritarians come to control Congress and the Presidency I have little doubt that THIS Supreme Court would approve such reactionary laws, since the Supreme Court majority now recognizes there are no explicit Constitutional rights being violated and can argue “the people have spoken through their representatives.”

I am not usually a doom and gloom kind of guy. I’m aware their reactionary extremist views on these issues may backfire on the Christian evangelical and MAGA authoritarian base and movement. But I’m not optimistic. Trump’s old VP Pence is already on record for a federal law against abortion, and the Federalist Society seems to consider pushing for a national law banning or severely limiting abortion (or gay marriage) only a question of the judicious wielding of political power.

You seem to know the laws involved well, and perhaps also have your own perspective on the political struggles that are likely coming. I would be interested to know your views on my OP here: The fight for abortion rights turns to state constitutions