Category: LGBTQ+ / Gay / Trans / Gender

Sen. James Lankford: The “Far-Left” Will Use Marriage Bill “As A Weapon To Crush Anyone Who Opposes It”

Sen. James Lankford: The “Far-Left” Will Use Marriage Bill “As A Weapon To Crush Anyone Who Opposes It”

What the hell is he talking about.   Push it to the next step?  Push what?   The sexual revolution?   Is he still on that old trope from the 1960s.   Really?   Take where it has never been before.    The Respect for Marriage act protects marriage equality for same sex and interracial couples.       What is taking it to where it has never been to protect marriages that have been the law for some time?  They cannot directly attack marriage equality without sounding like a bigot and a racist, so they try to sell fear.   Be afraid, they are going to crush you if you don’t love the gay marriage.  He acts as if everyone will be forced to have at least one same sex marriage in the family even if no one is gay.   I am so tired of these assholes misrepresenting, misdirecting, and misinforming their followers.    His whole thing was designed to give him a segment on Fox and to be repeated in right wing hate media.   A part of the public is going to lose their legal rights to marry the person they love and have the legal benefits of that recognized marriage just so republican right wing bigot racists can beat their chest they made their god happy.   Because clearly their god hates the same people they do and is powerless to stop crying unless the humans who follow him get to be cruel to others.    Hugs

From the Family Research Council:

During today’s episode of “Washington Watch with Tony Perkins,” Senator James Lankford (R-Okla.) announced for the first time that he will vote against H.R. 8404, marketed as the “Respect for Marriage” Act, if it comes to the Senate floor.

“The far-Left is trying to say we want to be able to push this to the next step” of the sexual revolution and “take it where it has not ever gone before,” said Lankford. “And we are going to absolutely oppose that.”

Overzealous federal bureaucrats, left-wing legal groups, and LGBTQ pressure groups are no longer saying, “We demand recognition” of same-sex marriage, said Lankford; they’re now saying, “We’re going to crush anyone that opposes our belief in gay marriage.”

“They want to take it the next step and then use” the bill “as a weapon [against] others” after this bill passes, Lankford forecasted.

 

SkokieDaddy – wiener dog dad • 2 minutes ago

“The far-Left is trying to say we want to be able to push this to the
next step” of the sexual revolution and “take it where it has not ever
gone before,”

By voting on legislation for SOMETHING THAT IS ALREADY LAW?

JackFknTwist • 3 minutes ago

We’re the ‘far left’ because we want to uphold the law as it is
!
\Who the fuck fall for this total shit ?

itsjoe618 • 5 minutes ago

Go ahead and vote against it, because voting against same sex marriage AND interracial marriage is such a popular position. Extending the marriage contract to same sex couples is “not sexual revolution.” It polls somewhere in the neighborhood of 60%-70% percent support for same sex marriage and over 90% support for interracial marriage. If by “crush people” you mean expect them to act like adults and not impose their extreme religious beliefs on everyone else, then yes, we expect that.

Gigi • 14 minutes ago

There is no far-left equivalent to the far-right fascists who attacked the Capitol and tried to overthrow the government. And the only ones looking to “crush” people are the right-wingers who want to overturn the Obergefell ruling and force their chosen religious beliefs down our throats.

Uncle Mark eats the rainbow • 17 minutes ago

How amusing. The very same people accusing us of pushing gay and “sexual agendas” on America are the very ones imposing their bullshit into women’s uteri.

Fuck off, you hideous freak!

Houndentenor • 29 minutes ago

Bitch, please. These are the same arguments they used to oppose Obergefell. It’s been seven years. None of those things happened. The only people affected are county clerks and gay couples who want to get married. All this law does is get rid of the last bits of DOMA so that when SCOTUS overturns Obergefell, gay couples in red states still have federal recognition of their legal marriages.

Ninja0980 • 36 minutes ago

Man who thinks it’s okay for 13 year old girls to be in sexual relationships says what?

April Smith • 42 minutes ago • edited

While a no vote will get little pushback or political damage here in Oklahoma I DARE R’s to collectively vote it down. That and their anti women agenda will hopefully blow up in their faces in November.

Texas Paul EXPOSES secret wedding recording of Republican who voted against his son’s marriage

Radical Republican House of Representatives member Glenn Thompson voted last week to prevent same-sex couples from having the right to marriage, then just a few days later, attends his own son’s same sex marriage. Meidas Contributor Texas Paul reacts and shows us a secret recording from the wedding.

Lauren Boebert’s attack on gay marriage DESTROYED by Tennessee Brando

Ultra MAGA Republican Lauren Boebert is back at it again spewing more hate and nonsense. Boebert recently went on the Charlie Kirk show where she said that she opposes same-sex marriage because it’s a part of the Democrats all-out assault on America’s traditional values. Meidas Contributor Tennessee Brando reacts

Republican Rep Gives Celebratory Speech At Gay Son’s Wedding After Voting Against Same-Sex Marriage Bill

Republican Rep Gives Celebratory Speech At Gay Son’s Wedding After Voting Against Same-Sex Marriage Bill

This insufferable bastard!   Hey my son is gay and found someone to marry, he can have marriage equality, but not your son or daughter they don’t have that right.   My daughter needs an abortion, she can have one but not you or yours, they don’t have that right.   If it is good for his son, and he is as happy for his son as he claims, vote for the law to protect it nationwide.    Hugs

“First of all, obviously, we hope right from the beginning, it’s all about having a healthy child. But it’s about being healthy. It’s about them being healthy. We hope for safety. We’re hoping that they find their way, find opportunity, they find inspiration.

“And as they grow and as they get a little older, we also hope and pray they’re going to find that one true love so that they have the opportunity to experience that: Someone to grow old with.

“So we’re just really thankful that you’re here. It actually goes beyond that, as parents. We love it when they find their one true love, especially when they become a part of our families then. That’s what we’re rooting for.

“We’ve been fortunate with three sons, and [REDACTED]’s done a great job of adding to the family. Every kid showed up through cesarean section so it wasn’t all pleasant, right! So this has been a really good experience, especially for Penny, to have a new son enter the family!

“So we’re just blessed, and we just want to say thank you to everyone here as part of the celebration.” – GOP Rep. Glenn Thompson, speaking at the wedding of his gay son after voting against codifying same-sex marriage.

There’s audio of the speech at the link.

 

Lauren Boebert Says Same-Sex Marriage Bill ‘Undermined Masculinity’

https://www.newsweek.com/lauren-boebert-samesex-marriage-bill-undermine-masculinity-turning-point-1727556

 

Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert has said the same-sex marriage bill that passed the House last week “undermined masculinity.”

Boebert made the remarks on Charlie Kirk’s podcast that was recorded during Turning Point USA‘s Student Action Summit over the weekend.

A video featuring her comments was shared by the Twitter page Patriot Takes on Sunday evening, amassing more than 34,000 views so far.

Kirk, the founder and president of the conservative nonprofit, had asked the congresswoman about the 47 House Republicans who last week joined with Democrats to pass the landmark bill that would codify protections for same-sex marriage into federal law,.

The Respect for Marriage Act came in response to the Supreme Court‘s reversal of Roe v. Wade in June, which stripped away constitutional protections for abortion and raised fears that other rights were at risk.

Boebert slammed the legislation as an “assault on America’s traditional values” on Kirk’s podcast.

“I think the federal government should not be involved in marriage,” she said. “My marriage between my husband is really between me and God, not between me and the government. But this was absolutely unnecessary. They have attacked our institutions. They have weakened the nuclear family and undermined masculinity and even femininity.”

She went on to say that the Republicans who voted in favor of the legislation—including Rep. Elise Stefanik, the No. 3 House Republican, and Wyoming Rep. Liz Cheney—did so because they wanted to avoid a political backlash.

Newsweek has contacted Boebert’s office and House Republicans, including representatives for Stefanik and Cheney, for further comment.

“They are absolutely afraid of attack ads,” Boebert said of the Republicans who voted in favor. “That always is the conversation that is taking place on the House floor.”

She continued: “This happens on a regular basis, whether it be infrastructure, whether it be funding whether it be sending more money to Ukraine… but they do not want the political attacks to come against them. And Charlie, I arrived in Washington D.C. on attack ads, so I’m not really afraid of another one.”

Kirk then seemed to suggest that opposing same-sex marriage “could be a signal boost if you handle it correctly.”

“Absolutely,” Boebert responded.

Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) speaks
Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) speaks during the Turning Point USA Student Action Summit held at the Tampa Convention Center on July 23, 2022 in Tampa, Florida. Boebert has said the same-sex marriage bill that passed the House “undermined masculinity.”JOE RAEDLE/GETTY IMAGES

“Look at the people who are fleeing the Democrat Party and coming over to the Republican Party,” she said.

“The only way we lose the midterms this November is if we start acting like Democrats, so we have to be firm we have to stand tall and and remain true to our principles. That is what keeps our base with us and is what is attracting Democrats to come to our party.”

The Respect for Marriage Act has bipartisan sponsorship, with Republican Senator Susan Collins serving as a co-sponsor. Republican Senator Rob Portman also recently announced he would co-sponsor the Respect for Marriage Act. Other Republican senators have also said they would vote for the bill—or were still considering it— NBC News reported.

In the Senate, which is evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, 60 votes are required to end unlimited debate and bring legislation to a vote. Though legislation only requires a simple majority to pass the Senate, lawmakers can use the unlimited debate tradition, called a filibuster, to indefinitely delay a vote on legislation.

Earlier in July, Boebert’s comments suggesting LGBTQ+ people cannot get pregnant and so should not be concerned about the recent Roe decision went viral.

 

Elagabalus • 23 minutes ago

“My marriage between my husband is really between me and God, not between me and the government.

Boebert: “But I’ll take those 1138 rights and privileges that civil marriage affords while denying them to gay people, thank you very much.”

Randy503 • 27 minutes ago

FFS. I spent over a decade beating back these stupid arguments. I thought with Obergfell it was over. Now we have to deal with this crap all over again.

rednekokie • 24 minutes ago

Sorry dearie, but God has nothing to do with your marriage. Marriage is a legal contract between two people — and, while many religions enjoy services which proclaim the marriage, those services are not legal, nor necessary to be married – at least in the USA.
So it’s about time you read up on the actual law in the matter, for the law is the only thing that counts in this country.

Bruno • 22 minutes ago

What do we think this means?

FRC: The GOP Is Selling Out Evangelicals On Marriage

FRC: The GOP Is Selling Out Evangelicals On Marriage

Another one who thinks his religion’s doctrines should be the laws of the country.   We are not a theocracy yet.   He doesn’t get to set the definitions of marriage for others.  I am so sick of these religious fanatics.   Notice he claims the court was activist when they grant rights but not activist when they remove them, like ending Roe.    Hugs

Via email from hate group leader Tony Perkins:

Never underestimate the Republican Party’s ability to self-destruct. That’s the one thing years of cultural battles have taught everyone.

Heading into November with the elections on a silver platter, the men and women who rebranded themselves as the forces of anti-wokeness have suddenly gone soft on an issue that should be a political no-brainer: marriage.

After seven years of letting the court take the heat for redefining history’s oldest institution, a surprising number of Republicans are making a fatal mistake — believing they can win back Congress by sounding just as radical as the party set to lose it.

If the GOP’s defectors are making a political calculus, it’s a terrible one. Conservatives who abandon marriage are only endearing themselves to two sets of people: radical Democrats who would never vote for them anyway, and moderates from both parties who wouldn’t make marriage the deciding factor of any vote.

Who they stand to lose, on the other hand, is far more significant this November. Not only do they risk suppressing their evangelical base, but also other Americans who: a) see same-sex marriage as the gateway drug to all of the transgender, LGBT, sex-ed chaos we’re experiencing in society; b) don’t believe an activist court should usurp the democratic process; and; c) disgruntled Democrats who thought the Republican Party would be the counterweight to the Left’s extremism.

 

Ninja0980 • 37 minutes ago

They slobbered over a thrice married adulterer among others so fuck off about how marriage is sacred.

Ščŏŧŧ Ċ – 🇺🇦 🕊 Ninja0980 • 31 minutes ago

Yes, Marriage is sacred, and Melanoma was the classiest first lady the country ever had.

Thumbnail

Gigi • 38 minutes ago

Marriage doesn’t belong to evangelicals, Tony. If you don’t support or agree with same-sex marriage, that’s your prerogative. But understand this — your chosen religious beliefs don’t give you the right to tell me that my 33+ year relationship to my husband isn’t as important as yours, or shouldn’t be allowed.

Paula • 27 minutes ago

Why should the fucking evangelicals get to decide who gets to be married.
I just looked this up on Pew research.
22.5% consider themselves to be evangelical. That is the same percentage as the Nones/No religion.

Tor Paula • 22 minutes ago

Unfortunately, the Nones don’t have a wealthy powerful (and noisy) organization to back them up. And if they did, they would not be Nones anymore.

JT • 37 minutes ago

On NPR I just heard some ignorant asshole’s voicemail comment that he didn’t think there needed to be any federal legislation to protect same sex marriage because you didn’t need to go to a church to get married.

Perhaps he wasn’t a dumbfuck but rather an evil bastard who was trying to throw some false shit out there to try to hold back support for the vote by giving idiots some dumb excuse not to support it.

heleninedinburgh • 33 minutes ago • edited

An activist court is usurping the democratic process.

Surprised to see him complaining about Thomas, Coney Barrett et al.

ChrisInKansas • 32 minutes ago

>>> Not only do they risk suppressing their evangelical base, but also other Americans who: a) see same-sex marriage as the gateway drug to all of the transgender, LGBT, sex-ed chaos we’re experiencing in society;

What the FUCK does this mean??? Gateway drug? Do they think we get married before the whole gay thing kicks in?

David Snyder • 43 minutes ago

He still believes God is going to give the Republicans a landslide in 2022, boy, is he going to be surprised.

S_E_P David Snyder • 30 minutes ago

If they eek out a meagre win after all the roadblocks and tricks they put up to rig the vote……theyll still call it a mandate.

Uncle Mark eats the rainbow • 23 minutes ago • edited

According to the 2020 US Census, only 23% of Americans are Evangelical. Why should 77% of Americans be subjected to their cult, their rules, & their gawd? Furthermore, they lost all moral authority when they made the very epitome of their anti-Christ their new orange messiah.

They can go burn with their loser conman.

KnownDonorDad • an hour ago

“I’m glad you like a book…”

Butch • 30 minutes ago

Americans who “b) don’t believe an activist court should usurp the democratic process,” Tony? You mean like the Supreme Court did with Dobbs? But I thought you liked that one.

The Gender Critical Movement has it all wrong

Today we’re going to talk about the Gender Critical movement, why their views on science and social issues are wrong, and what the real problems are that we should all be concerned about. Spoiler alert, violent hate crimes and discrimination are more important than guessing people’s chromosomes.

GOP Sen. Steve Daines: I’m A “No” On The Marriage Bill

GOP Sen. Steve Daines: I’m A “No” On The Marriage Bill

The Hill reports:

Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) on Monday announced he is opposed to federal legislation that would protect the right to same-sex marriage, joining Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) in speaking out against a bill passed by the House last week.

Daines, the junior senator for Montana, said in a statement he believes “marriage is between a man and a woman” and the push to pass the Respect for Marriage Act is a ploy from Democrats and Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

“I’m opposed to this bill and believe it’s another attempt by Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats to distract the American people from the inflation crisis, energy crisis and the southern border crisis they’ve created,” Daines said.

Read the full article.

Daines last appeared on JMG when he wondered “why we protect sea turtle eggs under the law but not human baby eggs.”

In May 2022, he was among five GOP Senators who authored a letter demanding that the FCC create a method for parents to block television shows that feature LGBTQ characters.

Last year, Daines lamented that Montana’s homemade meth industry has been taken over by Mexican cartels.

 

SkokieDaddy – wiener dog dad • 19 hours ago • edited

“I’m opposed to this bill and believe it’s another attempt by Speaker Pelosi and the Democrats to distract the American people from the inflation crisis, energy crisis and the southern border crisis they’ve created,” Daines said.

Gosh Sparklepants, where’s the legislation from your side to do something about inflation, energy or the border?

Len Ricci SkokieDaddy – wiener dog dad • 18 hours ago

or mass shootings and climate change or social security for the elderly??? I think Junior needs a lesson in compassion.

JW Swift SkokieDaddy – wiener dog dad • 16 hours ago

Oh, no, you misunderstand. He just brings those issues up because he wants to blame Biden and policies from the Democrats for them. His idea of “doing something about” those issues would be to defeat Democrats and put the Rethuglicans completely in charge. THEN things would get done!

JoeMyGodMod • 19 hours ago

Nobody expected Daines to be on our side, but consider his statement to be the first shot in the pressure campaign launched by NOM and Tony Perkins over the weekend.

Ross • 19 hours ago

If Steve does not believe in gay marriage, then he should not marry a man.

But for Steve to deny MY right to marry a man I love is just pure evil.

Motherfucker.

The_Wretched • 19 hours ago

““marriage is between a man and a woman”” Until such time as he finds a younger, hotter woman or his wife is dying of cancer. In which case, it’s one marriage at a time.

HZ81 • 19 hours ago

Republicans believe marriage is one man + the one woman he chooses to be his third or fourth wife.

‘Til Tuesday 👓 🌴 🩴🌞 • 18 hours ago

More Christian Nationalism. He’s trying to force those who don’t subscribe to his religious beliefs to live under them. These people don’t believe in freedom, but rather religious tyranny.

S_E_P • 18 hours ago

Its a distraction from Nancy Pelosi so we arent thinking about inflation.
Didnt nancy put a bill together to do something about gas prices/inflation that got filibustered in this dude’s chamber BY REPUBLICANS???

Ed B • 19 hours ago

It’s fucking infuriating that they are essentially voting against not just the gays, but interracial marriages too.

Shapiro Host: No Such Thing As Same-Sex Marriage

Shapiro Host: No Such Thing As Same-Sex Marriage

This is what we face.   Right wing media simply claims same sex marriages cannot be a thing, and it goes along with red states use don’t say gay laws.   They want to erase the public acceptance LGBTQ+ people have worked hard to get.   As I said before marriage is a legal contract between people and confers state and federal legal benefits.   What words mean changes over time and can be broadened when needed.    Marriage is not owned by religion.   Why do these people work so hard to destroy the rights of the LGBTQ+ that doesn’t affect them in anyway?   They are kids crossing their arms and stomping their feet saying they don’t like it.   Hugs

 

“What I suspect it is is that Marco Rubio doesn’t think that gay marriage is real. I think Marco Rubio believes that marriage is between a man and a woman and that there is no such thing as same-sex marriage.

“It’s just that Pete Buttigieg isn’t really married. And it’s hard — I know it’s hard to say that in our politically correct culture. But it’s not because two guys can’t be married to each other.

“Marriage is the union of a man to his wife. A perpetual union of a man to his wife for the sake of the generation and the education of children. That’s what it is. And that’s not possible between two men and two women.

“Marriage essentially has sexual difference at the heart of it. And so, if we call things that don’t have that marriage, we don’t expand marriage, we just get rid of marriage.

“If Pete Buttigieg and Chasten can be married, then marriage has no concrete meaning.” – Daily Wire host Michael Knowles, who also co-hosts Ted Cruz’s podcast.

https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3991429/embed/embed

https://www.mediamatters.org/media/3991429/embed/embed

 

   

BeccaM • 16 hours ago • edited

The “founders” would’ve been shocked that we did away with slavery, after going to war over it.

They would’ve been shocked to learn women were granted the right to vote, along with non-white men.

They’d have been shocked to discover we now not only had a permanent standing army, but it receives the lion’s share of the discretionary federal budget.

They’d have been shocked to find out we have rifles which can fire dozens of rounds a minute and are capable of literally shredding the human body. (And that we did not ban them for civilian possession and use.)

And they would have been completely flabbergasted to hear that we had an unfit and manifestly unqualified criminal President who launched a violent coup and threatened the lives of his Vice President and members of Congress so he could stay in power after losing his reelection—and we didn’t immediately arrest and imprison the treasonous, seditious motherfucker.

Joe in NM BeccaM • 16 hours ago

And they would be shocked to learn that a major party wants “religion” as a central theme.

ECarpenter Joe in NM • 13 hours ago

They would be shocked that there is a de facto two party system – they explicitly didn’t want political parties to form.

SilentMike BeccaM • 16 hours ago • edited

… and inter-racial marriage also comes immediately to mind as something they’d be shocked by.

BensNewLogin • 17 hours ago

They made the same stupid arguments during the marriage wars.

Houndentenor BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

And they never stopped believing those things. Did people think that just because they lost in Windsor and Obergefell that they would just give up and quit. They didn’t give up on overturning Roe and they won’t give up on overturning gay marriage either. They never give up. It’s the lesson the left never seems to learn. You don’t win your rights and then you can stop fighting. You win your rights and you have to keep fighting for them so long as there’s any opposition and at least in my lifetime there always will be.

K Elmquist BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

I’m surprised he didn’t mention marriage was divinely inspired. As well, using his argument that marriage is for the procreation of children would mean that all those married heterosexual couples that either can’t or have chosen not to have children aren’t married either.

Brian Penicook BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

So straight marriages that have no kids are not real either. I want to punch this guy. I’m pretty sure that’s not the right thing. Don’t like the second class, third rate status we enjoy.

ErnestMc BensNewLogin • 16 hours ago

Yes, those of us who have been involved with the marriage-equality fight have heard all these idiotic arguments 1000 times (and they’ve been shot down 1000 times), yet the bigots always think they’re the first to come up with them.

Randy503 BensNewLogin • 14 hours ago

I still argue with people about this. They claim we aren’t “really” married. I say, it doens’t matter what you think — we are LEGALLY married. You don’t have to believe it’s valid, or like it, or approve of it. And if we are not REALLY married, then why are you trying so hard to ban something that doenst’ exist? That always stumps them.

gyges Randy503 • 14 hours ago

Marriage is what the state says. Windsor proved the IRS and DOMA could not override state laws about inheritance. Obergefell expanded on this to say that if DOMA could not restrict the IRS, then “full faith and credit” required states to respect same-sex marriages, which should thus be available everywhere.

No religious leader informally deputized to act as an officiant or witness to legal marriages is required to marry people he or she does not want to marry.

GOP lawmaker attended gay son’s wedding 3 days after voting against same-sex marriage

https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-news/gop-lawmaker-attended-gay-sons-wedding-3-days-voting-sex-marriage-rcna39863

This is the new talking point to delay or get out of answering on the new law to protect marriage equality.   First they deny there is a threat to same sex marriage saying it is settled law.  That was the code words they used with Roe and we see what happened with that right.   Next they say it is a messaging bill, which in some respects it is.  It tells same sex couples that the Democrats and the country support their marriages and will put them in law to protect them.   The message the republicans are trying not to send is that they are against the marriage equality because they don’t want to piss off the gays that vote for them and the big money gays that donate to them.   Also this is a case of something that is good for an elite lawmaker but not for the public.  They can do it but make laws against you doing it.   I hate that.    Hugs

The gay son of Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., got married on Friday. A few days earlier, his father voted against the Respect for Marriage Act.
House Republican Conference at Capitol Hill Club
Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., leaves a meeting of the House Republican Conference at the Capitol Hill Club on Dec. 1, 2021.Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images
 
 
By Zachary Schermele

 

A Republican lawmaker attended his gay son’s wedding just three days after joining the majority of his GOP colleagues in voting against a House bill that would codify federal protections for same-sex marriage.

The gay son of Rep. Glenn Thompson, R-Pa., confirmed to NBC News on Monday that he “married the love of [his] life” on Friday and that his “father was there.” NBC News is not publishing the names of the grooms, neither of whom is a public figure. 

 

Thompson’s press secretary, Maddison Stone, also confirmed the congressman was in attendance. 

“Congressman and Mrs. Thompson were thrilled to attend and celebrate their son’s marriage on Friday night as he began this new chapter in his life,” Stone said in an email, adding that the Thompsons are “very happy” to welcome their new son-in-law “into their family.”

Gawker was the first to report on the nuptials in an article published Thursday, the day before the ceremony, though it was not reported whether the lawmaker would attend.

In an email last week to the local newspaper Centre Daily, Stone called the Respect for Marriage Act “nothing more than an election-year messaging stunt for Democrats in Congress who have failed to address historic inflation and out of control prices at gas pumps and grocery stores.” 

Thompson, who represents the state’s 15th congressional district, was one of 157 House Republicans who voted against the bill on Tuesday. However, 47 of his GOP colleagues joined Democrats to pass the bipartisan measure following fears that existing same-sex marriage protections could be in the crosshairs of the conservative-leaning Supreme Court. 

The Respect for Marriage Act is now being considered by the Senate, where 10 GOP lawmakers must join all 50 Democrats to send the legislation to the desk of President Joe Biden. One of five Republican senators who has already confirmed a yes vote on the bill is Rob Portman of Ohio, who declared his support for same-sex marriage in 2013 after his son came out as gay. 

The bill comes at a time when 71% of Americans, including a majority of Republicans, supports same-sex marriage, according to a Gallup poll last month.

While support for same-sex marriage has grown among Republican voters and some Republican lawmakers, the most recent Republican National Committee platform — enacted in 2016 and renewed in 2020 — includes at least five references to marriage as exclusively between a man and a woman.