Posted on Dec 8, 2022
Respect for Marriage Act clears Congress with bipartisan support
917
12
2
6
6
0
https://www.npr.org/2022/11/29/ [login to see] /same-sex-marriages-bill-senate-vote
Both the House and the Senate have passed the Respect for Marriage Act, which codifies same-sex and interracial marriages. The bill will head to President Joe Biden's desk to be signed into law, which is expected to happen soon.
The legislation passed 258-169 in the House Thursday with bipartisan support, after passing through the Senate last week with a 61-36 vote. Twelve Republican senators voted in favor of the bill.
Several LGBTQ members of Congress spoke on the House floor ahead of the vote, including Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., the first openly gay person of color in Congress.
"This bill will pass today but it is a reminder of the necessity of our vigilance in the fight for the human rights and need to hold the judicial branch accountable," Takano said. "We must rise to the challenge and we will prevail."
The bill would require that all states recognize same-sex and interracial marriages performed in any other state. It would not require that states individually allow these marriages to be performed. The measure also would recognize these marriages for consideration of federal benefits such as Medicare and Social Security.
Both the House and the Senate have passed the Respect for Marriage Act, which codifies same-sex and interracial marriages. The bill will head to President Joe Biden's desk to be signed into law, which is expected to happen soon.
The legislation passed 258-169 in the House Thursday with bipartisan support, after passing through the Senate last week with a 61-36 vote. Twelve Republican senators voted in favor of the bill.
Several LGBTQ members of Congress spoke on the House floor ahead of the vote, including Rep. Mark Takano, D-Calif., the first openly gay person of color in Congress.
"This bill will pass today but it is a reminder of the necessity of our vigilance in the fight for the human rights and need to hold the judicial branch accountable," Takano said. "We must rise to the challenge and we will prevail."
The bill would require that all states recognize same-sex and interracial marriages performed in any other state. It would not require that states individually allow these marriages to be performed. The measure also would recognize these marriages for consideration of federal benefits such as Medicare and Social Security.
Respect for Marriage Act clears Congress with bipartisan support
Posted from npr.orgPosted in these groups: 
Marriage
Same Sex Marriage
CongressU.S. House of Representatives
United States Senate
Marriage Same Sex Marriage CongressU.S. House of Representatives United States Senate
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
3
3
0
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
..."“No one’s religious liberties are affected in any way, shape or form,” Wagner said.
Republican Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah said he was “proud to once again vote in favor of protecting our LGBTQ and religious friends and neighbors.” He praised Senate changes to the bill ensuring that it would not affect current rights of religious institutions and groups.
“Civil rights are not a finite resource, we do not have to take from one group to give to another,” Stewart said.
The legislation would not require states to allow same-sex couples to marry, as the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision now does. But it would require states to recognize all marriages that were legal where they were performed and it would protect current same-sex unions if the Obergefell decision were overturned."...
..."“No one’s religious liberties are affected in any way, shape or form,” Wagner said.
Republican Rep. Chris Stewart of Utah said he was “proud to once again vote in favor of protecting our LGBTQ and religious friends and neighbors.” He praised Senate changes to the bill ensuring that it would not affect current rights of religious institutions and groups.
“Civil rights are not a finite resource, we do not have to take from one group to give to another,” Stewart said.
The legislation would not require states to allow same-sex couples to marry, as the Supreme Court’s 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision now does. But it would require states to recognize all marriages that were legal where they were performed and it would protect current same-sex unions if the Obergefell decision were overturned."...
(3)
(0)
2
2
0
This is great news.
When Roe was overturned conservatives said if liberals really cared about it they would have put legislation in place to protect it. In this case Democrats are preemptively doing it and conservatives are now complaining that liberals are wasting time an there are more important issues. Its almost like it isn't the action that is the problem but that it is primarily liberals doing it and anything they do, no matter what, is bad.
When Roe was overturned conservatives said if liberals really cared about it they would have put legislation in place to protect it. In this case Democrats are preemptively doing it and conservatives are now complaining that liberals are wasting time an there are more important issues. Its almost like it isn't the action that is the problem but that it is primarily liberals doing it and anything they do, no matter what, is bad.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google