47 Republicans Vote With Democrats to Protect Same-Sex Marriage

[essentialsaltes]

Today I Learned: Substantially the same bill was introduced in 2009, 2011 (when it got 3 GOP cosponsors), 2013, and 2015. So Congress was trying to do this legislatively before the SCOTUS Obergefell decision appeared to make it unnecessary to codify into law.

But this is the first time it went to a vote.

These are the Republicans who voted Yes:

Armstrong Republican North Dakota YEA
Bacon Republican Nebraska YEA
Bentz Republican Oregon YEA
Calvert Republican California YEA
Cammack Republican Florida YEA
Carey Republican Ohio YEA
Cheney Republican Wyoming YEA
Curtis Republican Utah YEA
Davis, Rodney Republican Illinois YEA
Diaz-Balart Republican Florida YEA
Emmer Republican Minnesota YEA
Fitzpatrick Republican Pennsylvania YEA
Garbarino Republican New York YEA
Garcia (CA) Republican California YEA
Gimenez Republican Florida YEA
Gonzales, Tony Republican Texas YEA
Gonzalez (OH) Republican Ohio YEA
Hinson Republican Iowa YEA
Issa Republican California YEA
Jacobs (NY) Republican New York YEA
Joyce (OH) Republican Ohio YEA
Katko Republican New York YEA
Kinzinger Republican Illinois YEA
Mace Republican South Carolina YEA
Malliotakis Republican New York YEA
Mast Republican Florida YEA
Meijer Republican Michigan YEA
Meuser Republican Pennsylvania YEA
Miller-Meeks Republican Iowa YEA
Moore (UT) Republican Utah YEA
Newhouse Republican Washington YEA
Obernolte Republican California YEA
Owens Republican Utah YEA
Perry Republican Pennsylvania YEA
Rice (SC) Republican South Carolina YEA
Salazar Republican Florida YEA
Simpson Republican Idaho YEA
Stefanik Republican New York YEA
Steil Republican Wisconsin YEA
Stewart Republican Utah YEA
Turner Republican Ohio YEA
Upton Republican Michigan YEA
Valadao Republican California YEA
Van Drew Republican New Jersey YEA
Wagner Republican Missouri YEA
Waltz Republican Florida YEA
Zeldin Republican New York YEA

 

[Nithavela]

Elise Stefanik, the #3 House GOP leader, voted for it.

In the House everyone runs every two.years.

Interesting.

Any chance they get primaried out for this? Or are there special protections?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Interesting.

Any chance they get primaried out for this? Or are there special protections?

There are no protections -- special or otherwise -- for GOP officials who defy The Party.
Perhaps some of them are planning to retire?

 

[Nithavela]

There are no protections -- special or otherwise -- for GOP officials who defy The Party.
Perhaps some of them are planning to retire?

I guess well see how many survive having a conscience.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

Perhaps some of them are planning to retire?

...Or some of them, or their family, friends, and associates could be affected if things get overturned.

 

[Hammster]

Are you suggesting that the First Amendment allows the Legislature to establish laws based on religious beliefs?

I’m stating that the first amendment doesn’t prevent it.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Interesting.

Any chance they get primaried out for this? Or are there special protections?

A lot of primaries have already occurred. Stefanik's is still in August, but she's running unopposed in the primary.

Lee Zeldin of NY also voted for it, but he's not running for reelection, he's now running for NY Governor, where a play to the middle makes sense.
Oh my!: Zeldin's running mate in the 2022 gubernatorial election, Alison Esposito, is openly gay,

 

[Hammster]

how is it not relevant?
Opponents to interracial marriage were all to happy to biblically condemn the practice exactly as you are condemning same sex marriage

Were there proponents of interracial marriage that used scripture to say it’s okay?

 

[TLK Valentine]

...Or some of them, or their family, friends, and associates could be affected if things get overturned.

...and no scheme for immunities for themselves? That's either good ethics or poor planning.

 

[Hammster]

I would be surprised if any significant number of the republicans voting for this bill were up for reelection.

They all are.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Although parties often vote as blocs for solidarity (with the leaders keeping members in line), on this vote, the GOP allowed House members to freely vote their conscience.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I’m stating that the first amendment doesn’t prevent it.

Sounds like we can indeed codify religious beliefs into laws.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Although parties often vote as blocs for solidarity (with the leaders keeping members in line), on this vote, the GOP allowed House members to freely vote their conscience.

How magnanimous of them.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Were there proponents of interracial marriage that used scripture to say it’s okay?

I don't know about Scripture exactly, but in the 1948 case that struck down miscegenation laws in California...

Petitioners contend that the statutes in question are unconstitutional on the grounds that they prohibit the free exercise of their religion and deny to them the right to participate fully in the sacraments of that religion. They are members of the Roman Catholic Church. They maintain that since the church has no rule forbidding marriages between Negroes and Caucasians, they are entitled to receive the sacrament of matrimony.

The religious aspect was not what the majority of the judges found compelling (although one did in a concurring opinion)

 

[Hammster]

Sounds like we can indeed codify religious beliefs into laws.

That’s always been the case. The question is, by what standard do we use?

 

[TLK Valentine]

That’s always been the case. The question is, by what standard do we use?

The Lemon Test, while not perfect, used to be the accepted standard. It remains to be seen whether the court's recent ruling in Kennedy v Bremerton will cause it to be discarded.

 

[Hammster]

The Lemon Test, while not perfect, used to be the accepted standard. It remains to be seen whether the court's recent ruling in Kennedy v Bremerton will cause it to be discarded.

If it’s not biblical, then it’s satanic. I’ll stick with biblical.

 

[TLK Valentine]

If it’s not biblical, then it’s satanic. I’ll stick with biblical.

And if you were able to, would you use the power of government to compel me to do the same?

 

[essentialsaltes]

If it’s not biblical, then it’s satanic. I’ll stick with biblical.

Indoor plumbing? Baseball? The Constitution?

These are satanic?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Indoor plumbing? Baseball? The Constitution?

These are satanic?

Women's suffrage? Heck, suffrage in general?
Abolishing slavery?
We've got a poster in another thread claiming the American Revolution was unChristian, as defiance of a Christian King is in violation of Romans 13...