Infernal_Arugula

Infernal_Arugula t1_iyf3nxf wrote

“the scumbag politicians always load other bullshit into them” this is often true but in this case you are wrong. If you actually took the minimal time and effort to read the bill you would see that it is very straightforward and that it actually does LESS than what most of the public understands it to do, not more.

2

Infernal_Arugula t1_iyf2pdn wrote

We do have a good idea. The original bill passed by the house was objected to by many senators for not having enough protection for religious freedom. The current version the senate just passed added protections for religious non profits to not have to officiate or recognize same sex unions. Several of the senators listed above came up with their own amendments that they wanted added that would have afforded even more protection to religious organizations/businesses who want to discriminate against same sex marriages, but those amendments were rejected when Chuck Schumer realized he could get a filibuster proof majority with the way the bill is written now.

1

Infernal_Arugula t1_iyf2cny wrote

Whatever the state law banning it says interracial is. If Loving v. Virginia were to be overturned, states would be free to pass laws banning marriages between whatever definition of different races they want to. One drop was the common historical formulation, but who knows what kind of whacky ideas conservative lawmakers would come up with today.

1