Speak now

Trump’s war against marriage equality is just getting started

In his first interview after winning the presidential election, Donald Trump said he considered same-sex marriage to be a settled issue and that he was “fine” with it.

This was a reversal of his comment calling the Obergefell v Hodges decision, which made marriage equality the law of the land, “shocking,” saying he was in favor of states deciding the issue for themselves. He also campaigned on appointing judges “in the mold of” the late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who was certainly no friend to the LGBTQ community.

Related: The only argument for marriage equality anyone should need

The plaintiff in that case, Jim Obergefell, said that he did not believe Trump when he claimed he would not go after gay marriage.

“He flips on pretty much everything he says,” he said. “Saying it’s settled law — that doesn’t mean anything.”

It seems Obergefell’s distrust was well founded, as we begin to see how LGBTQ rights are likely to wind up on the chopping block in the not too distant future.

There have been reports of a religious freedom executive order that would allow for a license to discriminate against the LGBTQ community, a draft of which shows that it would go even further to erode equality than originally feared.

While the Trump White House has done their best to quiet those concerns, and sources claiming his daughter Ivanka and son-in-law and adviser Jared Kushner were successful in stopping its progress after public backlash amid media reports, LGBTQ advocates remain on watch.

And for good reason, as Trump spoke at length about the importance of “religious freedom” at the National Prayer Breakfast, and his pick for the Supreme Court, Neil Gorsuch, ruled in favor of such exemptions in the Hobby Lobby case.

Congress could also pass the First Amendment Defense Act, which would also allow for discrimination against the LGBTQ community, by protecting those who would refuse goods and services based on the beliefs that: “(1) marriage is or should be recognized as the union of one man and one woman, or (2) sexual relations are properly reserved to such a marriage.”

Trump has pledged to sign it if passed, and Attorney General Jeff Sessions recently defended it in an exchange with Sen. Al Franken during his confirmation hearing process.

Related: Anti-Trump protest at Stonewall draws huge crowd

Providing a religious carve out to equal protections under the law could mean that while you get to stay married, you may find your rights in areas like employment, healthcare, housing, and private business quickly disappearing.

Meanwhile, lawmakers in Tennessee have introduced the “Tennessee Natural Marriage Defense Act,” which would result in the state only recognizing marriages between one man and one woman, and would require state agencies to ignore the Obergefell v. Hodges decision.

It is for this reason that the LGBTQ rights movement better kick itself into full gear, sooner than later. There is no time to waste.

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #alfranken #donaldtrump stories and more

55 Comments

  • GayEGO

    Jim Obergefell feels the same as I do, I saw and heard Trump say he would work to overturn marriage equality during the primaries. During the nomination I saw and heard Trump flip and say it was the law. But I felt that did not mean Trump would not work to overturn the law.
    I am not so certain that the law will be overturned because Gorsuch was nominated to SCOTUS as he is replacing Scalia who lost against marriage equality. I just do not know what will happen but I do believe if we keep on fighting for our equal rights, we shall overcome the bigots and win!

  • He BGB

    I am already facing that a national “religious freedom” bill is going to happen soon.

  • 1EqualityUSA

    Turn over the rock and discuss the creatures. Talking helps. Many would never have the occasion to think through our fate, had these struggles for equality not come to fruition. Our Constitution may be challenged, the notion of equal treatment may be bandied, but we cannot be defeated. This just further destroys the GOP’s reputation as a party. Keep your beliefs off of me.

  • jason_evans

    Trump is very homosexual-friendly. Stop being such drama queens.

    • DarkZephyr

      Explain how we are being drama queens when Trump supported one of the most anti-LGBT GOP platforms ever. Explain how we are being drama queens when over 90% of his cabinet picks are notoriously anti-LGBT. Explain how we are being drama queens when a leaked Executive Order draft shows conclusively that Trump has been considering making discrimination against LGBT people for religious reasons perfectly legal.

    • SeeingAll

      In certain minds Trump HAS to be a homophobe, or else it’ll mean the anti-Trumps were wrong (or lying) all along.

    • James

      Nobody here is interested in your trump reviews.

    • James

      Perhaps you might be more comfortable on a neo nazi website.

    • DCguy

      Oh Look, and anti-LGBT bigot who can’t even use the word “Gay” has come on to this blog to support Trump.

    • scotshot

      Don’t you have a Trump rally to go to?

      Worry about Trump giving Vlad Putin bl*wjobs

    • rextrek

      Hey IDIOT…as someone who has been OUT since [email protected], and have FOUGHT for OUR RIGHTS, I’ve seen, Heard and Witnessed for DECADES the GOP DEMONIZATION of OUR COMMUNITY……..Id NEVER EVER EVER Trust a Republican EVER! They Plan on Passing F.A.D.A. – First Amendment Freedom Act…..where LGBT people WILL BE DISCIMINATED Against in EVERY ASPECT of American Life…under the GUISE of Religious Freedom……. ITS coming….it WAS IN the GOP PLATFORM….I Read it word for word!

    • alterego1980

      I really don’t think Trump cares one way or another about marriage equality because it doesn’t affect him. But I see his administration and I am not stupid or naive. VP Pence is running that town now and he is chomping at the bit to role back LGBT rights and legalize discrimination in the form of religious freedom laws. It’s a matter of time before that happens in some form. Also, if one more supreme court justice from the center or left goes down, there is no doubt that their replacement will have any aint-lgbt track record. Then the real trouble starts.

    • gayjim1969

      People who claim that Donald Trump is “very homosexual-friendly” need to back it up with some facts. Just living high above NYC and occasionally reaching out to the LGBT communities–like he did the black community–doesn’t make him homosexual-friendly: it makes him politically savvy.

  • DarkZephyr

    I am assuming Mo Bro will show up and ridicule “liberals” for wanting to protect marriage equality.

    • Jack Meoff

      It is very telling that the very opinionated Mo Bro has not commented here at all. It seems we are losing people like Mo Bro and Brian only to have new profiles pop up like jason_evans and SeeingAll. I suspect they are the same people with new names.

    • DMRX

      jason_evans IS BRIAN. Unfortunately, he’s not gone — just got a new name.

    • 1EqualityUSA

      Breitbart had 800+ companies pull their advertising away, so maybe the payroll has fewer on the roster? SeeingAll used to be Neo_____ and some other Tx name. Brian is now Jason_Evans. Mo Bro is Yiannopolis. Hoffman is Alistair Wiseman. If they aren’t being paid by Breitbart to push their drivel, then they must be NOM-skulls or belong to the Mormon cult. Who else would spend hours, daily, countering comments were there no salary? Now that 800+ companies have pulled ads from Breitbart think of the tell-all books that will be coming to light, once these dark passengers are let go.

    • SeeingAll

      1Equality : A Texas profile ?? You’re going to need the psych unit again if you keep tallking that way. I’ll say it again : if you had no access to the media you wouldn’t even know if Trump or Clinton was President. That’s how little affect it has on your life.

    • 1EqualityUSA

      The community I work with are harmed. I see it and hear it.

    • dwes09

      It is quite obvious already that the installation of Trump will create a hugely different future than Clinton would have. To say someone would not know the difference is yet another example of the disconnect between regressives and reality.

      And it is always amusing how the names chosen by the regressives for commenting are in total opposition to their nature. “seeing all” seems to have poor, narrow vision.

    • SeeingAll

      dwes : But I’m happy. And dancing. Hey…MAYBE next election you’ll win. (Maybe not).

    • gayjim1969

      How can you “See All” when you’ve got your anti-LGBT, anti-liberal, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant, anti-globalism blinders on? There is nothing liberating about a limiting, conservative mindset.

  • Kieran

    If Donald Trump was gay friendly before (and he certainly was the most gay friendly GOP nominee in history) he won’t be for long if he reads gay websites like this. A lot of our drama queens are insistent that President Trump MUST be an enemy of all gay people.

    • SeeingAll

      Yet they let this imam (and Hillary’s cohort) calling for gay deaths in Orlando off without one single protest or complaint. This “logic” is probably why homosexual civilization doesn’t have much longer to exist. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vev-OzHQy94&t=30s

    • Lvng1Tor

      Oh you are so right…cause he should only be an ally if we all bow down and don’t question anything of him cause his fragile ego and support will go away unless we are good lil [email protected]&s!?! That’s not an ally, a confident, self-assured leader or a good person. He has built the most on the record anti-gay cabinet and VP ever. He can’t even tell the truth about the size of the crowd at his inauguration for crying out loud, he can’t let any criticism pass without lashing out on twitter, he sends his talking heads out to outright lie about the most ridiculous small things and then insist that it’s true no matter what and that to question the President will come with repercussions, he spends more time picking fights with Clothing Stores!?!..how can we trust him on anything? An ally is always an ally because it’s the right thing to do not because it’s convenient, everyone kisses your [email protected]@ and behaves exactly as you want them to. So you go right ahead and get on your knees…I’ll be standing tall and proud. And shove the “but Hillary” stuff…she isn’t the president, he is and he needs to act like it. All talking about Hillary is a distraction because you can not defend Trump’s actual behavior. It’s weak.

    • DCguy

      This is the right wing victim blaming example. “Gee, if Trump does something anti-LGBT it’s YOUR fault”.

      In other words, they are claiming that he is supposedly gay friendly, but are saving up an excuse just in case he turns out not to be.

      So Kieran. Here is a question for you. Please explain your definition for calling Trump the most gay friendly GOP nominee in history? He said the marriage ruling was aweful and he would appoint judges to overturn recent lgbt rights rulings. So what is YOUR definition of gay friendly? Or are you admitting that the GOP is so full of bigots that this bigot is slightly less of a bigot?

    • scotshot

      Trump’s our friend.

      Trump won’t like us if he reads this in Queerty.

      etcetcetc..

      Kieran attended and dropped out of Trump University.

    • gayjim1969

      Donald Trump is only gay-friendly when it suits him–always has been, always will be. The GOP set him an EXTREMELY LOW bar as far as gay-friendly GOP nominees. All he had to do was say some kind words to GLBT people, slap the back of a gay man on the stage of the RNC, recognize (GASP) gay people in the audience at the Republican convention, and say he’s “okay” with gay marriage–which means nothing since it’s his Supreme Court nominees that will have the say in the court.

      People like you blame the victim for the sins of those who have the power. “Don’t fight back…you’re only going to make them mad!” Bull! You haven’t lived your life as a minority. We won’t sit back and have our rights taken away!

  • MarionPaige

    As the saying goes, those who don’t know history (or who choose to ignore history) are doomed to repeat it. In the 80’s, Reagan pack the federal courts and the Supreme Court with “conservative judges” and, as soon as the Conservatives had the votes, The Supreme Court selected and decided a Reconstruction Era Civil Rights Law Case and The Supreme Court changed 100+ years of legal precedence. At the same time, there was an orgy of dismissals of civil rights lawsuits in federal courts around the country. In short,

    the rollback and gutting of civil rights laws has happened before, it’s history.

    • Kieran

      I know history. I know it was Republican Ronald Reagan who appointed Anthony Kennedy to the Supreme Court. And it was Justice Kennedy who cast the deciding vote to give the US Marriage Equality. Not everything is black and white.

    • MarionPaige

      It is clear that, as soon as there was a Conservative Majority on The Supreme Court, The Plan went into effect:

      1. The Supreme Court searched for and found a Reconstruction Era Civil Rights Case to decide;

      2. Civil Rights cases in federal court were all put on hold in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s shift;

      3. At the same time, Reagan was appointing a record number of conservative judges to the federal circuit; And,

      4. The minute the Supreme Court ruled that The Reconstruction Era Civil Rights Law COULD NOT be used in existing employment relationships, the orgy of dismissals of civil rights cases began around the country.

      5. In a lot of circuits, ALL PENDING CIVIL RIGHTS CASES were transferred to a newly appointed Reagan Judge for dismissal

      It’s the story only The Bitchless Blog has told.

      In one circuit, A WOMAN had had a sex discrimination suit pending in court for years. Upon the Supreme Court’s decision, her case was transferred to a newly appointed Reagan Judge who promptly dismissed the case. The woman’s father was so outraged, he cornered the judge in a room at his home, killed the judge then killed himself. Again,

      It’s the story you won’t see reported because, IMHO, it clearly shows long-range / long-term planning by Conservatives.

    • MarionPaige

      not only did The Event by The Supreme Court show long-term planning, it also revealed a co-ordinated attack strategy by Conservatives when they only had control of The Presidency and The Judiciary.

    • captainburrito

      Currently most circuit courts tilt liberal. If Trump remains in power for 8 years then the SC will probably end up 7 conservatives to 2 liberals and that will last a couple decades.

      Solution is to mobilize for Senate elections and the next presidential election. Longer term take back state legislatures or the House will never swing. People probably won’t do that until things get sufficiently bad and won’t have the patience – instead they will just protest and riot. U_U

    • rjmaquay

      What an asinine comment. Did you Take Con Law 101 at a community college? Reconstruction laws were pro-black. If what you said has any merit why didn’t Obama change the Civil Right Act when he had a congressional supermajority?

    • MarionPaige

      in response to The Supreme Court CHANGING 100+ years of legal precedence in re A Reconstruction Era Civil Rights Law (Patterson v. McLean Credit Union, 491 U.S. 164 (1988)), Congress passed The Civil Rights Act of 1991 holding that The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the law was wrong

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Rights_Act_of_1991

      Today, The Conservatives have control of all three branches of government

  • Daniel-Reader

    Under Christianity, Jesus forbid divorce so remarriage is considered adultery punishable by death in the bible. So under the First Amendment Defense Act, everyone could refuse to serve anyone who has been divorced or remarried. And all sexually active heterosexuals (much less non heterosexuals) who ever had relations outside marriage (including those who later got married) could be refused service unless they only had relations while married to only one other person ever. And because the children of remarried people are not supposed to exist according to the bible (the parents would have been offed for adultery), anyone could deny them service as well. So for example, Barron Trump or Trump’s other daughter (from his second marriage) could be denied service for their entire lives by everyone. Sounds like a bad law to introduce – since so many people including politicians and their families would be negatively impacted by it.

    • Realitycheck

      LOL Christians discriminate by picking and choosing what so called godly law to invoke and follow.

    • rjmaquay

      Hello I’m a Gay Liberal Millenial! I don’t bother with facts or critical thinking I just repeat slogans and memes fed to me by the media wholesale and you telling me to look at facts makes you a Nazi!

    • rjmaquay

      Under Christianity there is no death penalty numbnuts. How much theological education do you have outside of Facebook and 4Chan?

  • jason_evans

    Trump is homosexual-friendly. Only Leftist gays believe otherwise. The word “gay” is a corruption of male homosexual desire.

    • James

      You are racist.

    • James

      Go to a neo nazi website, they would be interested in your negative views of people who actually created gay liberation and fought for rights, unlike neo nazis like yourself who DID NOTHING.

    • dwes09

      Looky, looky: it is “Brian” with a new name but otherwise the same line of bull. Did you think we would not notice?

      But let’s look at your stupid lies for a second:
      Would a “homosexual-friendly” man appoint only those with a track record of opposing gay rights and gay people to the most powerful positions? Would a “homosexual-friendly” man promise evangelical christians, especially those in virulently anti-gay political action organizations, that they would succeed “beyond their wildest dreams” during their administration? Do you ever actually consider reality before you spout your nonsence?

    • DCguy

      Your wording is litterally WORD FOR WORD from the old Mormon gay conversion pamphlets. Nice try bigot.

      Now, please detail out exactly how Trump is gay friendly.

      Oh and one more thing, don’t make it so obvious you hate gays if you are trying to pretend an anti-gay bigot is a great guy.

  • Realitycheck

    Last I check, a while back, over 1 million LGBTQ in the USA had married, no way any judge will dissolve over half million marriages involving over 1 million people and that number is going up by the day..
    Not going to happen, plus I believe Goursuch might be a mix of conservative and liberal, he does attend a progressive LGBT church…. Of course we will find out once he is on SCOTUS.

    • James

      Oh please, they said they were going to deport 14 million latinos and you think 1 million gays is going to stop them from rolling back gay rights.

    • dwes09

      Although Trump disingenuously said marriage equality was “settled law”, he said no such thing (in fact he said the opposite) about reproductive choice, which given the dates of roe v wade is longer settled law than marriage equality. If he is willing to undermine the clear wishes of the majority of heterosexual women, and men (a clear majority of the country) do you imagine he would be at all hesitant to undermine the rights of the small homosexual minority?

      I grow very weary of the unrelenting stupidity of the right! You really need to evaluate things based on the real world and actual events, not the products of your addled imagination!!

  • Jack Meoff

    It’s interesting that whenever one of these policy stories pops up on Queerty their are comments by people who never usually comment on this site who are pro trump and seem to have an agenda of trying to influence peoples opinions and perceptions. Makes me wonder if they are even gay or just trying to sway public opinion within the gay community.

    • DCguy

      Anti-gay groups like NOM, and the LDS church have key word internet searches and are told to go to websites and pretend to be gay or a woman or black and to post some reply that causes some trouble.

      Remember when Same Sex Marriage looked like it would win there were a bunch of commentors that suddenly appeared on the gay blogs saying racist things? Somebody leaked memos from NOM saying their strategy was to try to create conflict between LGBTs and minority groups like African Americans so the minority groups would fight against marriage.

      Didn’t work but doesn’t mean they aren’t still trying.

    • Jack Meoff

      Thanks DC I suspected as much. Explains why they suddenly come out of the woodwork all at once.

    • SeeingAll

      You’re paranoid if you think a silly site like Queerty is even worthwhile or influential enough for anyone to bother making up alternate profiles for. This is the site with a few dopey followers and anonymous “journalists” who claim porn actors and drag queens are stars and Northern Ireland is Catholic. You have to get out into the real world more.

    • SeeingAll

      And who cares about swaying opinion in the gay community ? The election is over. Trump is El Presidente. And you gotta live with that whether you like it or not. (As well as living with your worst fear : that nothing homophobic will come out of the Trump administration at all).

    • 1EqualityUSA

      It’s their argument style that gives them away.

    • dwes09

      @seeing all: “You’re paranoid if you think a silly site like Queerty is even worthwhile or influential enough for anyone to bother making up alternate profiles for.”

      And yet here you are “brian”, one of several anti-gay people who changes their name regularly and comes here to argue against the accepted self-interest of gay people. Though in your case you may actually be a gay man, but with a crippling neurotic hatred of yourself and women. And obviously the notion that we need to “get out more into the real world more” is projection on your part.

    • SeeingAll

      dwes : Yes….but Trump won and now you just have to deal with that for the next four years. Maybe eight. – Seeing All / Brian / Whoever else

Add your Comment

Please log in to add your comment
Need an account? Register *It's free and easy.