this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2024
327 points (97.1% liked)

politics

18651 readers
4109 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The U.S. has not seen any negative effects on marriage, divorce or living arrangements among all couples since Massachusetts issued the first state-sanctioned, same-sex marriage licenses 20 years ago, a new analysis says.

...

The analysis found that after states legalized marriage for same-sex couples, marriage numbers jumped in those states at rates greater than what could be accounted for by the new marriages of same-sex couples alone.

Researchers found no consistent evidence of an increase in divorce as a consequence of legalizing marriage for same-sex couples.

The analysis suggests that issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples had, if anything, led to a small positive impact on marriage attitudes among high school seniors.

all 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 112 points 2 months ago (6 children)

But there have been more hurricanes per season, and we're getting hotter summers and colder winters. If that's not the gays, what is it? Greenhouse gases?

[–] [email protected] 35 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Definitely all the hot, steamy gay sex "conservatives" never never ever fantasize about.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

ah yes, the WIDE STANCE party....

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 months ago (1 children)

And the frogs are WAY gayer in Massachusetts now, why is no one talking about it?!

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

I mean you are.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Yes the gays control the weather. And until Taco Tuesday becomes a Federal Holiday, the hurricanes WILL continue!!

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Taco Tuesday: not just the weekly romantic night for lesbians anymore!

I support any legislation that supports lesbians and/or tacos. All REAL patriots do!

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

The honorable @tenchiken is recognized for House Bill, "AMERICA DEMOCRACY AND TACO DAY", which will enshrine Taco Tuesday and Election Day as a combined federal holiday to encourage universal participation in democracy by voting, carnitas, guacamole and salsa.

this shit would pass with a landslide

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 months ago

all the hot air coming out of everyone's mouth over this and every other social wedge issue

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

But there have been more hurricanes per season, and we’re getting hotter summers and colder winters.

There have also been recessions and pandemics. I only bring them up because they're specifically mentioned in the Gay Agenda, article 69, section 666, paragraph 13.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

I keep telling people they need to learn the true threat about the gay agenda, it's rule 34. Don't search about it unless you're a true conservative.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Cool. Unfortunately, facts and studies typically have little effect on the kind of people who oppose gay marriage.

[–] [email protected] 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

yes, but we still need to test our own ideas. sometimes we're wrong. we have these kinda of tests because sometimes things we think are very obvious are proven wrong under rigorous testing.

[–] [email protected] 22 points 2 months ago

Except on my relatives’ blood pressure, hey-yo!

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago (2 children)

But what about all the gay people now have mothers-in-law, which they didn't have before?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 months ago (1 children)

My soon-to-be mother-in-law is an absolute saint. I wish my biological mother was a lot more like her tbh

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago

(I too love my MiL.)

[–] [email protected] 2 points 2 months ago

Abstinence is the only answer

[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 months ago (2 children)

what are the possible negative affects of gay marriage? the premise makes no sense.

like it was goign to up the divorce rate or something? is that 'bad'?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

I remember when it was THE issue that re-elected bush - every single church-going person I knew came out with rafts of talking point bullshit how it would 'cheapen' hetero-marriage, how children seeing married gays would confuse them and mess them up, how there would be rafts of fake marriages for immigration and other specious reasons.

They had a ton of bullshit, none of it plausible.

Bush won in a landslide. :|

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 months ago

Eternal damnation, if that’s the nonsense you were groomed to believe as a child

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago

Awesome to see for gay marriage.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago

Marriage is basically a tax shelter in the US.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 months ago

Good. So now compare success of same sex marriage and non same sex marriage.