June marks Pride Month, a time of celebratory parades, parties and rainbow-drenched gatherings across the US. This month also marks the 10th anniversary of the Obergefell v Hodges decision — the landmark US Supreme Court ruling that legalized same-sex marriage in every state.
That case, which included several same-sex couples — some with children — ushered in an increased acceptance, visibility and, frankly, comfort level among members of the LGBTQ community and their families.
In subsequent years, the support for marriage equality ticked up among all groups, most starkly among Republicans, who for years ran as defenders of traditional marriage, supporting only unions between one man and one woman.
Illustration: Louise Ting
The trend saw Republican support reach 55 percent in May of 2021 and 2022 — a peak and up from 37 percent in May 2015 — according to a Gallup poll tracking the party’s alignment with same-sex marriage.
However, something has shifted in the past few years.
As happens with social progress, there has been a concerted and successful backlash to LGBTQ equality, driven by conservatives.
Gallup found a clear erosion in support of same-sex marriage among Republicans, with only 41 percent supporting it today, a 14 point drop in just three years. That decrease dovetails with findings that only 38 percent of Republicans now say same-sex relations are morally acceptable, down from 56 percent in 2022.
Overall, 68 percent of Americans support same-sex marriage, including 88 percent of Democrats and 76 percent of independents. The path to that level of acceptance took nearly 30 years — in 1996, when Gallup began tracking, only 27 percent of US adults approved.
However, the fight for LGBTQ equality has stretched far beyond three decades — a struggle marked by courage and persistence. Any sign of backtracking threatens to deny LGBTQ Americans and their families “equal dignity in the eyes of the law,” to quote Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the Obergefell decision.
The downward trend in support should come as no surprise. The war on “woke” specifically targeted LGTBQ people, not just transgender girls who want to play sports. Gay people, their history, traditions, status and culture have been targeted for erasure, whether in the form of book bans or attacks on drag queen story hour.
The US Department of Defense erased images that contained “gay” as a keyword in an effort to purge any trace of diversity, equality and inclusion (DEI).
US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth reportedly plans to strip gay civil rights leader and navy veteran Harvey Milk’s name from a ship. Companies such as Target Corp, once willing to dedicate parts of their stores to pride merchandise, began a retreat last year, fearful of a conservative backlash. And several companies scaled back or declined to renew their sponsorship of pride events this year.
Buoyed by the overturning of Roe v Wade, the Southern Baptist Convention voted earlier this month to legally fight to end same-sex marriage, putting the weight of the nation’s largest Protestant denomination behind the effort. Conservative legislators in at least four states, including Michigan and Montana, are pressing the Supreme Court to revisit same-sex marriage, passing resolutions that argue the issue should be left up to states.
The case of Kim Davis — a Kentucky court clerk who refused to issue a gay couple a marriage license over religious grounds — could make its way to the Supreme Court.
A Christian legal group, Liberty Counsel, plans to ask the court to hear her case with the aim of overturning Obergefell, which was decided 5-4.
“At least three sitting Supreme Court Justices (which includes Chief Justice Roberts) expressly wrote that the Obergefell opinion has no basis in the [US] constitution, meaning we have an excellent chance of overturning the case,” wrote Mat Staver, founder and chairman of the group, in a fundraising letter.
In his 2022 concurring opinion in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that the court, now dominated by conservatives, should reconsider its prior rulings on same-sex marriage, given that the related case law was built on the same arguments that supported abortion rights.
In response, Congress passed the Respect for Marriage Act a few months later, which requires that states recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states. What that law does not do is require every state to conduct same-sex ceremonies, or explicitly establish marriage as a fundamental right.
Conservatives worked for decades to overturn the right to abortion by backing dozens of cases that slowly chipped away at choice, creating a patchwork of laws, some draconian, state by state.
Nearly two dozen states have now banned or severely restricted abortion. Conservatives have signaled they want a similar fight to overturn marriage equality. This time, liberals and supporters of LGBTQ rights should take them seriously and fight accordingly to protect marriage as a fundamental right for all.
Nia-Malika Henderson is a politics and policy columnist for Bloomberg Opinion. A former senior political reporter for CNN and the Washington Post, she has covered politics and campaigns for almost two decades. This column reflects the personal views of the author and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
For nearly eight decades, Taiwan has provided a home for, and shielded and nurtured, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). After losing the Chinese Civil War in 1949, the KMT fled to Taiwan, bringing with it hundreds of thousands of soldiers, along with people who would go on to become public servants and educators. The party settled and prospered in Taiwan, and it developed and governed the nation. Taiwan gave the party a second chance. It was Taiwanese who rebuilt order from the ruins of war, through their own sweat and tears. It was Taiwanese who joined forces with democratic activists
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) held a news conference to celebrate his party’s success in surviving Saturday’s mass recall vote, shortly after the final results were confirmed. While the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) would have much preferred a different result, it was not a defeat for the DPP in the same sense that it was a victory for the KMT: Only KMT legislators were facing recalls. That alone should have given Chu cause to reflect, acknowledge any fault, or perhaps even consider apologizing to his party and the nation. However, based on his speech, Chu showed
RSS