Should Same-Sex Marriage Rights Be Codified in Federal Law? (H.R. 8404)

Do you support or oppose this bill?

  • 42.0k
    Voted Yea

    Consider the ramifications if the rights of same sex couples to marry are not a Nationally guaranteed right but is instead left to individual States to determine.

    Consider a gay couple legally married in their state on a road trip through another state that does not recognize gay marriage rights, and needing to spend the night to rest before continuing.

    Can they be arrested and imprisoned in this state for violating the retro-states sodomy laws?

    OK, I know that these laws have not reappeared in the retro states, yet. But, sodomy laws were retracted based in part on the same constitutional right to privacy which the conservative activist right-wing Supreme Court Justice wizards waived their infinite entitlement wands to declare no longer applied - just ignoring 50 years of precedence which was reaffirmed multiple times to ensure a women’s right to bodily autonomy as predicated on the right to privacy. 

    And anybody who is paying attention can see that such sodamy laws will be coming as the puritans continue to force their minority views on the majority.

    All basic human rights need to be enacted and protected nationally.

  • 96.4k

    Reasonable, proactive legislation since the current Supreme Court decides in favor of legislation and ignores regulations, case history and precedence.

    with the current Supreme Court, the only way to protect rights is via legislation.

    Until this current Supreme Court is changed in some way (change in membership, rules, ethics, etc) legislation is the only thing that can be relied on.

  • 65
    Voted Nay

    Get the government out of ALL marriage. 

  • 42.0k
    Voted Yea

    Yes, absolutely.

    Rights that effect people who are empowered to cross state borders must be preserved on a national basis. We no longer live in the eighteenth century when states were essentially democratic feudal societies where most people never crossed State borders, were mostly interdependent with people within their States and there were no abilities to rapidly communicate or travel to and from a national governance or even other States.

    A distributed State focused governance made a lot of sense in the eighteenth century. It still does for those specific issues that do not cross state lines and cannot effect or influence neighboring State's rights - like locality security and social services and the collection of locality taxes to pay for these services. Over-riding State's rights is a cumbersome, burdensome and contraditictory artifact left from what was needed 400 years ago for reasons which are irrelevant today.

    Issues that define basic human rights in this country are National issues and are not just State issues, and should be treated as such.

    Conservatives are generally focused on preserving or restoring 'what was' and are generally afraid of change. Liberals are generally focused on the 'what is or should be coming' and are not afraid of change nor taking proactive action to counter looming issues that threaten the future or to lead the charge to make our future better.

    The world is rapidly changing technologically, geo-politically, and way-of-life challengingly ways.

    Following the conservative mantra of burying their heads in the treasured grounds of the 'what was' in the seventeen hundreds will doom our country's and the world's futures.

    Consequential life threatening changes are now occurring which will require pro-active foreward-looking policies and actions by world-wide governances to address.

    Progressive, liberal oriented leadership is needed because the conservative 'what-was' is gone and will not come back no matter how hard they try, not ever.

    Well thought out and proactive actions are needed by people who are unafraid and capable of taking carefully risk mitigated actions to deal with the many known threats ahead.

    Vote Blue like your future life depends upon it - becuase, in most cases, it does! 

  • 5,397

    Republican hypocrisy in all its glory:

    Repubican votes against same-sex marriage bill then attends his gay son's same-sex marriage.

  • 8,330
    Voted Nay

    AOC pretends to be arrested and handcuffed today, in front of the SC. Pathetic and such a liar! She forgot for a moment and held her fist up for a fan.


  • 43
    Voted Yea

    I strongly urge you to support this Bill because the U.S. Constitution allows for "the pursuit of happiness" for all people. That's why this seems like a no-nonsense vote. 

  • 44
    Voted Nay

    Do not vote for HR 8404. This will destroy freedom of religion in America. 

  • 479
    Voted Nay

    Please vote against H. R. 8404, the government needs to stop meddling in definitions and needs to respect peoples' religious views. Attempting to force acceptance of non-traditional relationships will only invite more conflict and turmoil, and more government harassment of people for their religious convictions. Please vote NO on HR 8404.

  • 211
    Voted Yea

    No man, woman, or child is safe from the current right wing political activist clique of the U. S.Supreme -- nor from MAGA radicals in the Republican Party, the RNC MAGA  leadership, Congressional MAGA enthusiasts, MAGA Republican-led state legislatures, or local MAGA radicals, all of whom who are determined to deny certain American citizens -- mostly minorities -- equality and equal protection under the law.

    This group of "America First", dyed-in-the-wool Trump enthusiasts and 2020 election deniers are on an anti-democratic rampage and hope to create an authoritarian government in the United States made in their image where minorities -- particularly LGBTQ+ individuals -- would be refused marriage rights that the rest of our citizens take for granted, not to mention a myriad of other rights guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution.

    I grew up in the 1950's when LGBTQ+ individuals were oppressed, beaten, hung, drowned, burned, tarred and feathered, and driven to suicide. Those horrendous things still happen today, although thank God less often. Nonetheless, LGBTQ+ youth still suffer extremely high rates of suicide and transgendered individuals are vilified and still at high risk of being beaten or murdered on the street.

    With Obergefell v. Hodges, the Supreme Court made it legal for LGBTQ+ individuals to marry their same sex partners.


    In my lifetime, I have seen a better day dawn for the civil rights of LQBTQ+ people, but right-wing Justices such as Clarence Thomas have put those hard won rights in jeopardy.


    I strongly urge Congress, especially my own Congressional representatives from Texas, to pass legislation to permanently protect the right of LGBTQ+ individuals to marry their same sex partners.

    It's past time to end the fear that LGBTQ+ civil rights can be snatched away by the hatemongers and those who want to exercise jurisdiction on the private lives of their law abiding fellow citizens.

  • 138
    Voted Yea

    Marriage rights are between 2 consenting adults and she be allowed no matter what gender they may be! I am a straight woman married to a straight man and how consenting adults live their lives is noones business but their own. Codify marriage equality now!

  • 61
    Voted Yea

    There's all this talk of personal freedom and religious protection in terms of rights. It only seems to apply to Christian beliefs though, and only in terms of taking rights away from others. I was raised christian and that God is everywhere. That is why I treat all creatures humans, animals, the planet with respect. Seeing christians use obscure passages to restrict if not outright bans the freedoms of others is sickening. Who you love shouldn't be illegal.

  • 57
    Voted Yea

    This is a basic right all couples should have regardless of their makeup. It needs to be protected via federal legislation.

  • 300

    No no no

  • 46
    Voted Yea

    The math is simple. 71% of Americans support same-sex marriage. The Senate must do their duty and represent the people by passing this bill and protecting rights that are in danger of being taken away by the minority- packed Supreme Court.

  • 86
    Voted Yea

    This shouldn't be a question in 2022

  • 50
    Voted Yea

    The Respect for Marriagebact is an important first action to ensure out LGBTQ citizens as fully accepted members of the US. 

  • 39
    Voted Yea

    State law has always regulated marriage (age, closeness of relationship, etc.). But a marriage legally performed in one state is recognized in all other states and under federal law. For example, in some states you can marry your first cousin, in other states only if one party is sterile, in other states not at all. But if you marry your first cousin in a state that permits it, and you move to a state that does not, your marriage does not become null and void. Ditto if you marry at, say 16 years old, in a state that allows that.You move to a state that does not allow that, you are still married. (But maybe we need a federal definition of marriage as only two people?)

  • 1,358
    Voted Yea

    Only the Christian Taliban are against it. After the recent Supreme Court decisions, I no longer have any respect for our judicial system and will do whatever I can to undermine it. 

  • 38
    Voted Yea

    I support codifying same sex marriage. It's unfortunate that the Supreme Court has become a political body that doesn't reflect the will of the people.

    Congress can correct the injustice that's likely to come from this radical right wing body.

  • 50
    Voted Yea

    SEPARATE CHURCH AND STATE! Why would we care if same sex marriages had equal rights, or could exist period, unless it was some misguided effort to manipulate Christians to forget what it is to be an American as well. We came here to escape tyranny largely shaped by leaders who were religious zealots or whom did not want to be turned on by the populous. Well gang, here we are again only now it is the place we escaped to the FREE government we formed, the Constitution meant to protect us from religion influencing decision making. 

  • 1,811
    Voted Yea

    If you believe in God and the infallibility of God then you should certainly support same sex marriage because God made LGBTQ people too.

  • 9,037
    Voted Yea

    Protection of all peoples rights needed.

    My question is will Clarence Thomas want to go after the Loving decesion allowing interacial marriage now ????????

  • 235
    Voted Nay

    It's my Christian (follower of Christ) view is that marriage before God should be between a man and a woman.  Civil unions of same sex situations for legalities are something that need to be worked out.

  • 48
    Voted Yea

    Who someone loves & wants to be with is NO ONE ELSES BUSINESS