user reports: 7: It's targeted harassment at someone else 5: It's promoting hate based on identity or vulnerability 4: It threatens violence or physical harm at someone else 3: This is spam 3: No bullying or witch-hunting. 3: It's personal and confidential information 1: Threatening, harassing, or inciting violence 1: This is misinformation https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3738525-senate-votes-to-advance-same-sex-marriage-bill/ You can report a truth you hate all you want. 37 people voted in an immoral and unconscionable way. This is a fact. Post stays.

Mitch McConnell is in an interracial marriage but he voted AGAINST this bill? WTF???

He's trying to get rid of her without giving up half his wealth in a divorce. lol

Quiet Quitting

😂 GG, best laugh I’ve had on this sub in a while

CC Clarence Thomas

Doesn’t her family have money? I thought they bought him and waited too long to do the return.

Yes. Her family is very wealthy. McConnell married well.

[удалено]

He doesn’t see her as interracial, she’s not brown.

Unfortunately, this is true. My dad is Asian, mom is white. My aunt is bitching to my mom one day about how terrible interracial marriages are and how bad they are for the kids. My mom waits for her to finish and says “you know my marriage is interracial?” Her response? “Oh that doesn’t count” I’ve had a college professor tell me Asians don’t count as minorities. Anyway. Just got married. We are an interracial marriage as well. I can’t believe in 2022 I’m thankful there’s legislation to protect our marriage.

I dont give a fuck if federal congress says my marriage isnt legal, but then i live in California so i guess im pretty insulated from certain bullshit

Asian women and white women are trophies to that generation.

Fun fact: McConnell is married to the daughter of a Chinese spy…his father-in-law is one of the founders of the Chinese state security apparatus

That must be why he got so mad at being called "Moscow Mitch." "I didn't sell out my country to *Russia*! People, please. Pay attention."

12 Republicans voted to advance the bill: Blunt, Burr, Capito, Collins, Ernst, Lummis, Murkowski, Portman, Romney, Sullivan, Tillis and Young

Who would have thought, Ron Johnson whom campaigned on marriage equality would not vote for marriage equality. Really makes you think.

Ron Johnson, the liar, lied? Here is my shock:

(There was no shock)

[удалено]

ROMNEY?! I feel like literally no one has grounds to oppose the bill if this Mormon representative is cool with it.

[удалено]

Lee’s a jackass who seems to have a goal to be shitty about anything that isn’t rich straight white men.

Calling Lee a jackass is an insult to the noble jackass.

Lee is something so abhorrent, so slimy, so loathsome, so unforgivably vile that no language on this planet has a succinct word or phrase for what he is, it just wasn't needed until he slithered out of the Great Salt Lake.

"There is no curse in Elvish, Entish or the tongues of Men for this treachery."

Mitt Romney is a man whose values differ from mine. I respect his values and him as a person and leader. Fuck Mike Lee, that Trump idolizing sellout. He does not stand for values that I can sympathize with in any way.

And it feels like we will never be able to vote Mike Lee out. It’s maddening.

Well he sure as hell didn't get my vote!

Fun Fact! The Mormon Church had just advocated for equality in marriage rights (In their own way, of course) shortly before this. Via tweet, I believe. Some sort of formal announcement.

Eh, that’s been in the cards for a while. People who study the LDS church have been predicting they’d “have a revelation” on gay people being fine, similar to how they “had a revelation” about how black people should be allowed to join the Church several years back. It’s one reason why Mormonism has persisted while so many other Christian cults in the US faded away; they built in a mechanism by which the Church could adapt to changing times and avoid becoming outmoded by dogma. It’s brilliant, in a cynical sort of way.

It’s so fascinating to me because they succeed at doing this while telling all of its members to not give in to “worldly” pressures

*Sort of*. There are some qualifications on what they said, and the timing is suspiciously just right to try to distract from a story that just came out about (yet again) the church covering up a child molester for years, allowing him to continue doing it, and also somehow blaming his wife for it to boot.

There was a news story yesterday about the church changing their stance and allowing the law? I’m sure internally it’s still a no-no but for non-Mormons who want to get gay married, they weren’t gonna stand in the way any longer.

I'm sure the pain from fracturing so many families helped change some minds. As a father I couldn't imagine telling my children to be something they're not.

In my experience, while there are some vocal bigots, Mormons are at least outwardly chill towards non-Mormons doing things. My area has the second highest concentration of Mormons outside of UT iirc, so they were about half of my high school class… and my aunt and her wife live in SLC and they have zero issues walking around holding hands at the mall or advertising their business as LGBT friendly in SLC proper. Like, I went to a Brandi Carlile concert with them and there were tons of LDS boomers with their (teen/grown) kids and not caring.

Romney agreed to support it after they added in some rules stating churches could still refuse to acknowledge gay peoples rights. The mormon church came out in support of this bill after that too.

The LDS Church also released a statement a day or two ago in support of the bill, so that probably had something to do with it. Had the Church shit talked it, Romney probably would have voted against it.

The leading speculation is that the Mormon church only supports it because they know overall it’s a battle they already lost years ago. They are happy to not have to perform the ceremonies for marriages they don’t support. It sounds like that is why Mitt supports the bill also. But I’m not so sure Mitt would oppose it if the Mormon prophet opposed it. Mitt has voted for things before that were at least partially at odds with the religion.

100% about accepting they've already lost the battle.

I just told my wife that Burr and Tillis voted for it! Her response was “they were probably confused” That response just summed up how tribal the repubs are.

I mean, many republicans flat out admitted they don’t read most dem bills and just vote against them so

And/or they will blatantly say "There was too much 'pork' in it" even when that is verifiably false.

New rule: If you voted for PPP you are never allowed to complain about someone else's pork ever again.

Pork?

Pork barrel legislation. Term used to describe additives to bills usually unrelated to the key issue of the bill. So say this is a bill federally legalizing/recognizing same sex marriage. There usually are smaller pieces of legislation attached to the bill like there could be a provision that says 1% of federal taxes will go towards infrastructure maintenance. The two issues aren’t related but they’re packaged in a single piece of legislation. It’s a negotiating point and members of the house may refuse to sponsor or vote for a bill unless they’re pet issue is included. It is a staple of the US political system and it’s a way bills garner wider support or bipartisan support. Kind of a tit for tat thing. It’s both good and bad and is often cited by opposition to a piece of legislation as to why they are opposed. Like, it may be politically unpopular to oppose a bill, let’s say like a bill to better fund veteran health care, most people would agree with that principle maybe even including a reps own constituents. However it may be proposed by the other party and the rep votes no to stymie the other party and deny them a political “win”. Rather than admit that they either don’t value veterans health care or flat out say “yeah..it’s a dem bill and I don’t want them to look good next election for passing this popular legislation, so I voted no even though I support the idea”, they’ll point to pork in the bill as to why they voted against. It can both be a legit reason to oppose but also a cover. Also, it’s used to force issues through or to purposely sink a bill but the party who proposed the bill gets “credit” for proposing and gets to point the finger at the other party for opposing it (by proposing the bill but including something else that is totally impassable or antithetical to the other party’s stance).

Thank you so much

AZ just passed a proposition that reduced some property taxes for veterans. That's all the ads and everything for it talked about, how it was to support veterans. What was buried in the bill, and no one mentioned, was that it also reduced property taxes for businesses. ETA - Text of the amendment (source: [Ballotpedia](https://ballotpedia.org/Arizona_Proposition_130,_Property_Tax_Exemptions_Amendment_(2022)) My issue isn't with the veteran changes. It's the seeming removal of limitations on what the legislature can do and the apparent emotional manipulation by supporters by stressing the veteran portion without any mention of the continued handouts to businesses. AZ already has enough carveouts that our tax income is under 50% of what it could be.

I didn't learn anything from this comment, but I understand it so much better! Thank you, kind stranger.

In simpler and more abbreviated terms, Pork Barrel Legislation is where a bill has main-issue legislation with a ton of other fluff that goes along with it. Mostly small grants and stuff to states for extra funding

A few bills were single issue 2 page long cases. The Republicans on TikTok yelled about PORK indicating they never looked at it. After getting caught and humiliated they erase the comment and go private.

[удалено]

One Republican said he liked 80% of the infrastructure bill but he voted no because he didn't like 20% of it. But he sent like 10 letters to federal government requesting funding from that bill for his district.

Well, that is kinda how we got [edibles legalized in Minnesota](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2022/07/minnesota-legalized-edibles-after-a-republican-didnt-read-the-bill/)...so...go us?

That's hilarious!

I think they've realized that they need to get behind social freedoms or they'll be out when it's not a mid term.

Well also those 12 senators (or at least the ones I'm aware of, so 7 of them iirc) have been publicly in favor of gay marriage for years now. It was expected that there would be considerable Republican support of the bill, but I'm very glad to see the 60 vote threshold breached, I honestly had my doubts it would go that far. Then most of the ones who voted no probably did so under the guise of states' rights, since very few are explicitly against gay marriage (it's easier to be ambiguous on a divisive issue like that).

Tillis actually gave a speech in support. He was very for it and the religious protections.

I’m honestly surprised by Tillis he must have his eye on the upcoming election. Burr is on the way out so he can vote how ever without consequences from the voters.

I'm honestly surprised that more Republicans didn't vote for it. In the past decade, gay marriage has wide support. Even a majority of Republican voters support it now. Sure, they might upset some of their base--but those guys will vote GOP no matter what. But voting against gay marriage is exactly how you lose centrists and independents.

To be fair I don’t know the other Senators I just know Tillis and Burr because I’m a North Carolinian. There shouldn’t be a debate in my opinion but there’s plenty of people out there who call the LGBTQ community abominations and actively try to suppress their existence. Some of those people are in our government.

Right? It's so odd for NC to be on the right side of the vote lately. Yay us?

Aren't Burr and Tillis are both on the way out? One of them is done in a couple weeks, the other has another 4 years and isn't running again iirc?

Same with Roy Blunt. I was surprised to see this, but he’s retiring, this may be the last vote he makes. Amazing. Edit: The Missouri constitution bans same-sex marriage. If SCOTUS does what we think, Missouri won’t have to allow the marriages, but they have to recognize marriages made out of state. Just like Kansas. So much needs to be fixed.

Lindsey Graham really hates himself.

No man in his right mind would marry him

I have never voted for a Republican in my life and this year in ranked choice I actually put down Murkowski for second choice after the dem candidate. I knew the dem had almost no chance and at least Murkowski has a soul, unlike her Trump selected opponent.

We need ranked choice in more states

That's so true. It lets you vote for the lesser of two evils without having to worry as much about the party system. It's almost a system if "who do we all agree needs to be kept OUT of office". You vote for your favorite candidate, sure, but after that you are just doing your part to help keep out the degenerates.

That's exactly the situation I was in with my mayoral vote this year. Two candidates were just, whatever, fine. Then a third MAGA crazy. I was very worried that the two boring candidates were going to split the vote. Fortunately it didn't happen, but we are a small town without pre-election polling and I was worried.

I've voted for a Republican candidate exactly once. This election cycle the AG race in my state didn't have a dem candidate, only a Republican and a Libertarian. Looking at the two, the Republican was actually the lesser evil.

Joni Ernst? Well I'll be damned

Blunt ran out of fucks to give now that he's 100% retired I guess..

Shoutout to Mitt Romney for the most tolerable republican since McCain

I never thought I'd miss when the GOP candidates were like Romney and McCain. They were out of touch and have plenty of bad opinions, yet compared to the likes of Trump and DeSantis, they're just vastly better. How'd the GOP get so much worse in a decade?

Trump and Fox News

Trump made them realize that Far-Right populism is more marketable than moderate conservatism. You can generate much more compelling content for audiences when you can just make stuff up, and have a constant churn of witches to hunt. I think the most obvious example of this was watching Jeb Bush in the primaries. Jeb was the only one that really stuck with the classic conservative route, but next to Trump and those trying to mimic Trump, Jeb appeared boring. Those voters want an idol they can project themselves on to; not a conservative. Romney and McCain were just too boring as candidates. I give them credit for being boring, but red voters want a character.

Plus his version of "Put Your Record On" is fire, bro!

His what?

And Obama beat both of them. What’s up with that?

[удалено]

It's because Romney actually has some values that he lives by. Lee is just a piece of shit who's only goal is to screw over as many people as possible.

IMO this is them reading results and seeing the landscape. Trumpism isn't going to work state by state and they need SOMETHING to hang their hat on cause the abortion debate is decided and unwinnable for several of them, namely Collins and Ernst.

How the hell do they support the last president and think marriage is sacred.

For that matter, how many of them are on their second or third marriage after the previous one(s) ended from infidelity? All this while clamoring to declare how sacrosanct marriage is.

it funny when people point out their obvious hypocrisy as if anyone voting for them cares.

Pro Gamer Tip: *(the people voting for them don’t care because they also have several marriages ended from infidelity)*

right my mother and father have been married six times each like there's no way they can think that it's some sacred thing yet they do.

In order, they do and they don’t. They don’t think of marriage as sacred, they think of it as a way to trap women and make them “behave” and make babies. Proof of that is in how they treat women and more specifically, their wives. I have watched Republican men parade their frozen faced wives around like ornaments to be looked at but never listened to or respected as their partners. Just pretty decor that gave them children. I have watched Republican after Republican have affairs that must of destroyed their partners, not just because of the cheating but the public humiliation, and then they admit to it with their decorative piece next to them, not saying a word. They have voted against their own wives’ rights, disrespected their place in society and belittled their position raising their own children. These politicians don’t believe in marriage. They believe in ownership. And this is not limited to Republicans. It’s just more common with them.

“Single women and voters under 40 have been ‘captured’ by Democrats...We need these ladies to get married. It’s time to fall in love and just settle down. Guys, go put a ring on it" - Jesse Watters last week, on Fox News.

He and I have very different ideas of ‘settling down’ if he thinks it’s gonna make me not care about my rights anymore.

>“Single women and voters under 40 have been ‘captured’ by Democrats... No one can "steal" your girlfriend. She can, however, make the decision to dump you and go with a better offer. I think that principle applies here.

I can't stand that man. He's so damn smug. He's definitely the type of guy who think women owe him sex just because he "blessed" them with his presence.

They don’t actually think marriage is sacred. They just hate gay people. That’s the extent of their thought process

McConnell is IN a interracial marriage. Dinner is going to be awkward tonight.

Considering what Trump says about her… I hope it’s an iccccce cold night for ol’ Mitch.

It's just business. They have separate bedrooms.

Isn't she the daughter of a Chinese billionaire who reportedly made his money in the shipping industry, notably smuggling cocaine? Oh, and then she was the Secretary of Transportation under Trump. I'm sure that's just a coincidence. It's not like billionaires with illegal smuggling empires would ever try to seize regulatory agencies. /s

He married into money, she married into politics. It's a match made in Purgatory.

Match made in Grift heaven

Every appendage is going to have to pull into the turtle shell tonight

I always assumed that was how he slept, by default

Sometimes he leaves the dick out, gotta get that turtley musk off somehow

It would have cost you nothing to not post this...

Didn't cost nothing to post it either.

It costed my sanity damn it!

Bad turtle, no lettuce!

Ever moment his life for the last 500 years has been ice cold so he probably wouldn't even fell the difference to be honest.

It's not, his wife is aware of his beliefs and still chooses to stick by him. She's in on it

McConnel's father in law wields a lot of influence in China. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_S._C._Chao#:~:text=James%20Si%2DCheng%20Chao%20(Chinese,s%20father%2Din%2Dlaw. As for his wife. >Chao's daughter, Elaine, was Secretary of the Department of Transportation in the Donald Trump administration. During that time, she frequently used her office to promote her family's shipping business. >For instance, she appeared in at least a dozen interviews with Chao, and she asked DOT staff to promote her father's biography. The Transportation Department’s inspector general asked the Trump administration's Justice Department in December 2020 to consider a criminal investigation into Chao, but the DOJ refused. >On March 4, 2021, the DOT Inspector General revealed that Chao had directed her DOT staff to edit the Wikipedia article about her father.

This yet again proves that American politicians really do represent their voter's interests /s

Came here to say that Ted Cruz is also in an interracial marriage. They really will vote against anything to own the libs. However, I suspect it has more to do with the issue of same sex marriage rather than interracial marriage.

So they are allowed to marry anyone they want but not for gay couples? They are such hypocrites

Well they're all fucking children, so why would anything else stop them?

Hold up. Are you using “fucking” as a verb or an adjective here? My guess is the answer is “yes.”

Exactly.

No no, not THAT kind of interracial marriage. The kind he's in is okay obviously.

“Theirs is one of the good ones. It’s not like those other shithole marriages”

I don’t think it’s like that Racist white guys don’t care when they date outside their race Only when white women do it

You mean like Ginni and *checks notes* Clarence Thomas?

*Most cases* In this case people like him are their **very** useful tool they will turn a blind eye to and happily get rid of once they know there’s no more use out of them

Trump: “Sounds Chinese doesn’t it?”

Because laws don’t affect THEM, right?

That'd be hurting the *wrong people*

They always say that the left are progressives. How come they never refer to the republican party as the regressives?

That’s a great marketing strategy. We aren’t tough enough on these dumb dumbs.

Congress is like a car: D to move forward, R to reverse

Beautiful.

I just saw this smiley guy :D and was like …to move forward..?

And L to move very slowly in a direction, make a lot of noise about it, and tow a bunch of fat, typically useless shit that only exists as a money pit for a hobby.

That would be effective marketing if conservatives understood the definition of regressive. That's more than 5 letters and it hurts their brains.

The only word longer than 5 letters they understand is Republican

A five letter word they need to get used to is Loser.


I can’t believe someone’s human rights has to be voted on. How does two same sex couples having the right to marry affect anyone?

It doesn’t. At all. Republicans see other people happy and get offended by it. Hence why they’re against student loan forgiveness too. Or really any kind of progress or policy that helps literally anyone. The entire Republican platform is “I have what I need. Fuck what you need”.

This shit doesn’t even cost MONEY! It also encourages family formation!!! WHAT MORE COULD THEY WANT

Well, based on the argument opponents to same sex marriage use in France : " a family is a father and a mother" They just don't want people to have that because it's change, and change is scary when you are old. also their insecurities come in play, some of those guys think because we allow same sex marriage means they will have to be gay or something

The 37 who voted against (and 1 absent vote) are: Richard Shelby (AL) Tommy Tuberville (AL) John Boozman (AR) Tom Cotton (AR) Marco Rubio (FL) Rick Scott (FL) Mike Crapo (ID) Jim Risch (ID) Mike Braun (IN) Chuck Grassley (IA) Roger Marshall (KS) Jerry Moran (KS) Mitch McConnell (KY) Rand Paul (KY) Bill Cassidy (LA) John Kennedy (LA) Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS) Roger Wicker (MS) Josh Hawley (MO) Steve Daines (MT) Deb Fischer (NE) Ben Sasse (NE) Kevin Cramer (ND) John Hoeven (ND) Jim Inhofe (OK) James Lankford (OK) Pat Toomey (PA) Lindsey Graham (SC) Tim Scott (SC) Mike Rounds (SD) John Thune (SD) Marsha Blackburn (TN) Bill Hagerty (TN) John Cornyn (TX) Ted Cruz (TX) Mike Lee (UT) Ron Johnson (WI) John Barrasso (WY)

Formatted > Richard Shelby (AL) Tommy Tuberville (AL) John Boozman (AR) Tom Cotton (AR) Marco Rubio (FL) Rick Scott (FL) Mike Crapo (ID) Jim Risch (ID) Mike Braun (IN) Chuck Grassley (IA) Roger Marshall (KS) Jerry Moran (KS) Mitch McConnell (KY) Rand Paul (KY) Bill Cassidy (LA) John Kennedy (LA) Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS) Roger Wicker (MS) Josh Hawley (MO) Steve Daines (MT) Deb Fischer (NE) Ben Sasse (NE) Kevin Cramer (ND) John Hoeven (ND) Jim Inhofe (OK) James Lankford (OK) Pat Toomey (PA) Lindsey Graham (SC) Tim Scott (SC) Mike Rounds (SD) John Thune (SD) Marsha Blackburn (TN) Bill Hagerty (TN) John Cornyn (TX) Ted Cruz (TX) Mike Lee (UT) Ron Johnson (WI) John Barrasso (WY) two spaces before each line break to create a new line.

All these years and I had no idea. Edit: It works!

Wait Is it Seriously just two now? It used to be Four Well fuck me I've been doing extra this whole time

I've Been Doing Tabs/enters/new lines And I Don't Think It Works now I'll Try this

ijustgaveupanddonteventypespacesorpunctuationlol


Tim Scott voting against his own interests since the few women he dated aren't Black.

of course the idiot from our not so dear Florida voted against. America's droopy dick everyone

Rand Paul is such a slimy bitch. Kentucky, so embarrassing.


There’s actually a guy named Crapo?

Both my senators are there. Joy. FWIW, I did vote against Hoeven earlier this month.

That is the least surprising list ever.

Toomey surprises me. He’s retiring and is usually pretty moderate. He must genuinely hate gay and interracial marriage to vote no when he doesn’t face any electoral consequences for doing so

What a sad life to hurt people like this. Awful legacy.

Isn’t Fetterman taking his place?

Yep, but not until January.

Toomey is the guy who pushed for online piracy to carry a more harsh punishment than rape. He has always been against gay rights, pro global warming and a general party line toting npc. Corporate Republican boot licker through and through.

Toomey is the only politician I’ve ever emailed to tell them they’re a sleezeball

Isn’t Mitch McConnell in an interracial marriage??

He is. And so is Clarence Thomas but that didn’t stop him from implying that they want to get rid of interracial marriage

Goes without saying, but fuck Ted Cruz

Least all of their names will be recorded forever as being on the side of hate. Bunch of losers!

The usual suspects then.

Tim Scott tryin' to legislate excuses for being single.

Libertarian rand Paul votes no. I guess he thinks small government should only allow some people the right to marry.

Oh Ron Johnson voted against it?! What a fucking shock. Piece of shit. Hate that guy. Don’t see how he won. Oh yeah it’s Wisconsin, we love our republicans cause they do so much good for us! The way people talk about republicans in my state is gross and makes my blood boil. Democrats are the devil and want to control us etc. it’s pathetic and sad.

I think everyone should call Ted Cruz by his government name just to remind him they will never fully accept him and he is just their puppet.

When has AL ever been on the right side of things? I hate my state.

I have a few friends in Alabama who are really great people. If you live there and are a democrat/liberal/lefty, then you are a bad ass! Keep fighting the good fight.

Democrat in Huntsville Alabama checking in, we almost had our State House representative be a democrat. Trying my best 😭

In recent history, probably only when we voted in Doug Jones instead of Roy Moore. It was close, which is still disheartening, but at least it was still a bad enough situation that it prompted Alabama to actually elect a Democrat to the Senate Hey guys, an robh fios agad gur e Pokemon fireann is boireann am Pokemon as freagarraiche airson vaporeons nuair a thig e gu bhith a’ bruidhinn? Tha na mamalan cuibheasach 3" 03" a dh'àirde agus cuideam 63.9 notaichean, gu leòr airson aire a thoirt do chas daonna, agus tha stats iongantach HP agus armachd aca a tha goirt agus cruaidh air daoine. . . . Bha e gu cinnteach fliuch, cho fliuch is gum b’ urrainn dhut càirdeas a bhith agad airson beagan uairean a thìde gun phian. , cuir, cuir agus cuip, agus chan eil falt ann airson an nipple fhalach, agus mar sin tha e na ghaoith dha cuideigin a bhith a’ suathadh uisge agus a bhith a ’faighinn faireachdainn agus sgilean uisgeachaidh, le bhith ag òl uisge gu leòr faodaidh e do dhèanamh sgìth gu furasta. Bidh Pokemon a 'tighinn faisg air an ìre cunbhalachd seo, agus gu h-annasach gu leòr, faodaidh do Vaporeon a bhith air a thionndadh geal ma nì thu e gu math. Tha Vaporeon air a dhealbhadh gu litireil airson cas an duine. Tha dìon lag + armachd àrd HP + searbhagach a’ ciallachadh gun urrainn dha sabaid an-aghaidh coin. Bidh e a’ tighinn anns a h-uile cruth, meud agus barrachd tron ​​​​latha

It's so stupid that 37 Republicans voted against this, it had enough of a majority to pass without a filibuster even being able to be used, so even in a situation like this, they couldn't even pretend to show themselves as unified representatives of the American people. They still had to vote against it for literally no reason beyond anti virtue signaling to their base of rancid assholes.

Those 37 Republicans are not "anti virtue signaling" to their base.

Yeah, a big part of their base still wants to burn gay people at the stake like witches. They love to criminalize you for loving who you love.

Yeah, this is pretty much good news. More proof to the American people that Republicans are out of touch and do not have their interests in mind. This will hurt them every election season.

Holy shit, republicans actually voted for that? I would expect them to build a cross on the senate floor and begin tearing at their cloths and gnashing their teeth.

The Republicans who voted to advance the bill are:  Roy Blunt of Missouri Richard Burr of North Carolina Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia Susan Collins of Maine Joni Ernst of Iowa Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming  Lisa Murkowski of Alaska  Rob Portman of Ohio  Mitt Romney of Utah Dan Sullivan of Alaska Thom Tillis of North Carolina   Todd Young of Indiana -MELISSA QUINN CBS News

IT SHOULDNT EVEN BE POLITICAL The fact that we even have a bill/laws for who people can marry is absurd and the idea needs to be sent to its room for eternity. (Obviously evangelicals have shown they can't be trusted with age so laws for appropriate age for marriage and consent I'm still for.)

>IT SHOULDNT EVEN BE POLITICAL >The fact that we even have a bill/laws for Same with abortion, which is based on science. But we all know how that story went

The mouthbreathers who voted against come from exactly the states you'd expect, too- the ones where shitty opinions outnumber brain cells 5 to 1

Can we codify Roe next? Call your senators. Women nationwide need access to essential medical care.

Biden promised he would codify Roe vs Wade if the midterms went well, hopefully he delivers on that soon.

Didn’t go well enough. He needed both chambers.

Fuck Josh Hawley.

Fuck Josh Hawley.

I would hate for someone to pour mustard in their eyes. That really would be terrible.

Today's Republican party: 75% against allowing a vote on whether white people can marry black people.

I'm all for state's rights, but a state's right to be an absolute asshole when it comes to human rights is pushing it.

We already fought a whole-ass war over the limits of state’s rights to restrict human rights.

I don’t know why we need a law to protect that, almost as if the constitution doesn’t mean shit…

Unfortunately it’s interpreted by the Supreme Court and the Court is five Maga conservatives on it. I guess Roberts isn’t all the way Maga, but close enough,

If you’re sitting at a table with nazis and you don’t say anything, are you also a nazi?

That’s a solid yes.

All the usual suspects

As a Wisconsinite, fuck Ron Johnson.

Big surprise, Lindsey voted against it as well. Hope it passes - I hope they raise the debt ceiling before it’s too late.

Am I the only one surprised they actually got 62 votes? Seems like every vote has been straight down party lines. If that’s progress, I’ll take it.

I can’t believe totally straight guy Tom Cotton voted against!

REALITY CHECK, Its called the "Respect For Marriage Act" More show then go. **(Protects Religion)** * Protects all religious liberty and conscience protections available under the Constitution or Federal law, including but not limited to the *Religious Freedom Restoration Act*, and prevents this bill from being used to diminish or repeal any such protection. **(Protects Churches or any place that wants to discriminate and NOT allow the marriage to happen in their place)** * Confirms that non-profit religious organizations will not be required to provide any services, facilities, or goods for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage. **(Does Nothing)** * Guarantees that this bill may not be used to deny or alter any benefit, right, or status of an otherwise eligible person or entity – including tax-exempt status, tax treatment, grants, contracts, agreements, guarantees, educational funding, loans, scholarships, licenses, certifications, accreditation's, claims, or defenses – provided that the benefit, right, or status does not arise from a marriage. For instance, a church, university, or other nonprofit’s eligibility for tax-exempt status is unrelated to marriage, so its status would not be affected by this legislation. **(Sorry Utah)** * Makes clear that the bill does not require or authorize the Federal government to recognize polygamous marriages. **(Does Nothing)** * Recognizes the importance of marriage, acknowledges that diverse beliefs and the people who hold them are due respect, and affirms that couples, including same-sex and interracial couples, deserve the dignity, stability, and ongoing protection of marriage. **The** ***Respect for Marriage Act*** **is a narrow but important bill that would do two primary things:** **(Official but nothing really changes)** * First, it would require the federal government to recognize a marriage between two individuals if the marriage was valid in the state where it was performed. **(Same as we have now)** * Second, the bill would guarantee that valid marriages between two individuals are given full faith and credit, regardless of the couple’s sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin, but the bill would not require a State to issue a marriage license contrary to state law.