Six South Carolina Lawmakers Are Trying To Redefine Same-Sex Marriage
We’ve been seeing a lot of pushback in countries that have already legalized gay marriage.
Late last year, Bermuda became the first country ever to reban same-sex marriage. Lawmakers decided to switch out same-sex marriage for civil partnerships just six months after the country’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of marriage equality.
Then, we recently reported that religious groups are fighting to have marriage equality repealed in Taiwan before it can officially instate it and become the first Asian country to do so.
Now, it looks like we have rumblings of the same in America.
The “Marriage and Constitution Restoration Act” is trying to work around the Supreme Court ruling of 2015.
The proposed bill is trying to "define certain terms, including ‘parody marriage’ and marriage;' to provide that parody marriage policies are nonsecular in nature; to prohibit the state from respecting, endorsing, or recognizing any parody marriage policy or policies that treat sexual orientation as a suspect class; and for other purposes.”
Ultimately, this bill, in an act of complete pettiness, wants to create two different kinds of marriages in South Carolina. If passed, straight couples would get regular marriages and gay couples would get “parody-marriages.”
“The bill notes: ‘civilizations for millennia have defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.’
‘Marriage between and man and a woman arose out of the nature of things and marriage between a man and a woman is natural, neutral, and noncontroversial, unlike parody forms of marriage.’
“It goes on to claim, ‘In the wake of Obergefell v. Hodges [the case that prompted the SCOTUS ruling on same-sex marriage] there has not been a land rush on gay marriage, but there has been a land rush on the persecution of nonobservers by Secular Humanists and an effort by Secular Humanists to infiltrate and indoctrinate minors in public schools to their religious world view which is questionably moral, plausible, obscene, and is not secular; and … it is unsettled whether or not sexual orientation is immutable or genetic and is therefore a matter of faith.”
The bill was first read and referred to the Committee of Judiciary on February 15.
On top of that, the representatives sponsoring the bill are Steven Wayne Long, William M ‘Bill’ Chumley, James Mikell ’Mike’ Burns, John R McCravy III, Josiah Magnuson and Richard ‘Rick’ Martin.
We'll keep you updated as the story continues.