A total of 47 U.S. House Republicans joined all Democrats on July 19 in voting to redefine the federal definition of marriage so that it will include any “two individuals,” rather than the union of a man and a woman.
The legislation now heads to the U.S. Senate where Democrats must convince at least 10 Republicans to back the radical bill in order to achieve the 60-vote, filibuster proof threshold.
Democrats introduced the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act” in order to repeal the longstanding – albeit unenforced – Defense of Marriage Act, which acknowledges in federal law that marriage is the union of a man and a woman, and protects the rights of individual states to do the same.
The new legislation would require the federal government to recognize any state marriage between any “two individuals” and make every other state recognize these marriages as well. In short, the new legislation mandates that the federal government accept any definition of marriage which a state might allow for in the future, including polygamous relationships.
Senate Democrats are now looking to left-leaning Republicans like Murkowski to join their ranks and move the bill to Biden’s desk.
ALASKA WATCHMAN DIRECT TO YOUR INBOX
CNN reported on July 20 that Murkowski said she would like to codify same-sex marriage in federal law to ensure that the U.S. Supreme Court cannot overturn the 2015 decision that struck down state marriage laws and mandated same-sex “marriage” in all 50 states.
“I have suggested to others that not only would I like to see Roe, Casey, and Griswold on contraception codified but I’ve also made clear my support for, for gay marriage years ago,” Murkowski said, according to CNN. “So, I will look at what the House is doing and see what that might mean here on the Senate side.”
In 2015, Murkowski praised the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision that prohibited states from defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. She claimed the court’s decision “promotes family values” and “encourages more families to form.”
Many critics of same sex “marriage,” beg to differ, and note that it has led to an all-out assault on gender distinctions across the board. If biological sex doesn’t matter for marriage, then why should it matter for adoption, women’s sports, bathroom or locker room usage or anything else?