(Joshua Paladino, Headline USA) Congressional Republicans throwing support to a bill that would formally codify gay marriage and other court-upheld practices sought to clarify that the federal government’s new definition of marriage will not include throuples, group marriages or other forms of polygamy, Axios reported.
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and other establishment Republicans have no problem with codifying homosexual marriage in federal law, but they hoped to assuage worries about further alterations to the world’s oldest institution.
“We are listening carefully to the concerns that have been raised by some of our colleagues,” Collins said about fellow Republicans, apparently indicating that she does not share their objection to legalized polygamy.
Senate Democrats need 10 Republican votes to circumvent the filibuster and pass the Respect for Marriage Act.
“One part of the bill, it makes very clear that marriage is between two individuals, and another part of the bill, the language needs to be clarified,” Collins said.
The Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that all states must issue marriage certificates to homosexual couples.
Though no substantial executive, legislative or judicial challenge to this ruling has emerged—except for Justice Clarence Thomas’s comment that the case does not have a sufficient legal basis—the Democrats hope to keep using gay marriage as a campaign issue.
The suggestion that Obergefell is under attack effectively drafts the LGBT community into promiscuous women’s organized resistance to the overturn of Roe v. Wade’s federal abortion mandate—a battle that otherwise affects very few same-sex couples.
Some conservatives have seen the Left’s recent embrace of certain sexual taboos—including transgender rights, child-grooming and “puppy play“—as an ominous sign portending America’s inevitable slouch toward Sodom and Gommorah.
Collins promised, however, that the bill does not prepare the way for polygamy.
“There is not a single state that allows for polygamous marriages,” she said, virtually guaranteeing that California will take up the crusade before the decade’s close.
Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wisc., who earlier supported the bill, said that it will no longer earn his vote because it may threaten religious liberty.