THIS IS A BFD

As Presdient Biden said as Vice Presdent when Obamacare was passed, “This is a BFD!”

Indeed it is and I for one never expected to see it. I had a hard enough time in 2015 realizing that the Supreme Court could recognize the right to same-sex marriage. I never thought the national legislative body could find the votes to accomplish this.

But today, in the United State Senate, proponents took a crucial step toward passing landmark legislation to provide federal protections for same-sex marriages when 12 Republicans joined Democrats to advance the Respect for Marriage Act, putting it on track to become law in the twilight of the Democratic-held Congress. There will be no filibuster

The 62-37 vote came days after the midterm elections in which Democrats retained control of the Senate but were on track to lose the House to Republicans. It is a rare and notable last gasp of the unlikely bipartisanship President Biden brought to his wins in the past year by a lame duck Congress.

This signals a remarkable shift in American politics and culture, demonstrating how same-sex marriage, once a politically divisive issue, has been so widely accepted in society that a law to protect the rights of same-sex couples across the country could gain decisive, bipartisan majorities in both the Senate and the House. Last summer, 47 House Republicans joined Democrats to pass a version of the bill.

Senate majority Leader Chuck Schumer, whose daughter and her wife are expecting a baby next spring, said that passage of the legislation, now expected after Thanksgiving, would be “one of the true highlights of the year for this body” and “one of the more significant accomplishments of this Senate to date.”

Even though same sex marriage is supported by 70 percent of Americans including a majority of Republicans, 37 Senate Republicans, including Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, voted against.

The bill repeals the Defense of Marriage Act, which denied federal benefits to same-sex couples, though it does not require every state to allow same-sex marriage. However, under the federal system, the law means all states must recognize any marriage lawfully performed in any other state.

Originally, Democrats did not see this as more than a demonstration to voters of where they were at on the topic, initially seeing is as an election-year maneuver to show voters that they were doing everything possible to protect same-sex marriage rights in the face of new threats from a conservative Supreme Court.

The push to bring it up for a vote began after Justice Clarence Thomas suggested in his opinion in the ruling that overturned the 50-year-old Roe v. Wade decision that established abortion rights that the court also “should reconsider” past rulings that established marriage equality and access to contraception.

Senator Tammy Baldwin, the lead sponsor, said that gay people were “scared for good reason” and that the same legal arguments the conservative-leaning Supreme Court rested on to reverse Roe could just as easily be applied to other cases, noting that Justice Thomas in his dissent “was essentially providing an open invitation to litigators across the country to bring their cases to the Supreme Court.”

For once, the usually-worthless Senator Susan Collins, one of the 12 Republican supporters of the bill, emerged as a strong supporter and stated “there is still value in ensuring that our federal laws reflect that same-sex and interracial couples have the right to have their marriages recognized regardless of where they live in this country.” The bill also codifies federal support for interracial marriage, which has only been supported heretofore by the 1967 Supreme Court ruling in Loving v Virgina.

The successful vote on Wednesday marked an improbable outcome for a measure that was once regarded as a symbolic act by Democrats to show their support in the face of solid Republican opposition that would block it from clearing Congress.

The Senate added language to the House-passed version that ensures churches, universities and other nonprofit religious organizations could not lose tax-exempt status or other benefits for refusing to recognize same-sex marriages and could not be required to provide services for the celebration of any marriage. They also added language to make clear that the bill does not require or authorize the federal government to recognize polygamous marriages.

The bill now returns to the House, which must pass the revised version before clearing it for President Biden’s signature.

Here’s the surprising list of Republican Senators who voted for the measure: Roy Blunt of Missouri (retiring), Richard Burr of North Carolina (retiring), Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, Susan Collins of Maine, Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, Rob Portman of Ohio (retiring), Dan Sullivan of Alaska, Mitt Romney of Utah, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska (maybe not in the Senate next term), Joni Ernst of Iowa and Todd Young of Indiana.

To those who say that it’s not a full victory since heterosexual marriage doesn’t have the caveats listed above, I may be as a straight person not the one to declare what’s good and bad, but as a gay friend of mine said when we talked about this last summer, “Who wants to be a member of a club that doesn’t like you?” I personally believe that those caveats will not be permanent.

This is an unexpected victory worth celebrating. When I think of the gay people I have known over the past 60 years who have suffered terrible consequences for the “crime” of being who they were, any progress in the right direction is a win in my book. I only wish my oldest friend from kindergarten, one of the bravest people I ever knew, who lived his very successful life against the odds, knowing at age 10 who he was - back in a time when acknowledging such could have gotten him killed - was alive now to see this. You won, Dave.

David Faris, 1944-2016

You can support That’s Another Fine Mess with a paid subscription that costs only $7/month or $70/year, saving you $14.

Comments are for paid subscribers.