{"id":2452441,"date":"2025-06-26T14:17:02","date_gmt":"2025-06-26T18:17:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/4-reasons-scotus-should-overturn-obergefell-now\/"},"modified":"2025-06-26T14:22:29","modified_gmt":"2025-06-26T18:22:29","slug":"4-reasons-scotus-should-overturn-obergefell-now","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/4-reasons-scotus-should-overturn-obergefell-now\/","title":{"rendered":"4 Reasons SCOTUS Should Overturn Obergefell Now"},"content":{"rendered":"<aside class=\"mashsb-container mashsb-main mashsb-stretched\"><div class=\"mashsb-box\"><div class=\"mashsb-count mash-medium\" style=\"&quot;\"><div class=\"counts mashsbcount\">14<\/div><span class=\"mashsb-sharetext\">SHARES<\/span><\/div><div class=\"mashsb-buttons\"><a class=\"mashicon-facebook mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.conservativenewsdaily.net%2Fbreaking-news%2F4-reasons-scotus-should-overturn-obergefell-now%2F\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Facebook<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-twitter mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"https:\/\/twitter.com\/intent\/tweet?text=&amp;url=https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/?p=2452441&amp;via=ConservNewsDly\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Twitter<\/span><\/a><a class=\"mashicon-subscribe mash-medium mash-nomargin mashsb-noshadow\" href=\"#\" target=\"_top\" rel=\"nofollow\"><span class=\"icon\"><\/span><span class=\"text\">Subscribe<\/span><\/a><div class=\"onoffswitch2 mash-medium mashsb-noshadow\" style=\"display:none\"><\/div><\/div>\n            <\/div>\n                <div style=\"clear:both\"><\/div><\/aside>\n            <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 4.0.47--><p>The text reflects on the 10th anniversary of the U.S.Supreme court decision in *Obergefell v. Hodges*, which legalized same-sex marriage, arguing that it fundamentally redefined the institutions of marriage and family.The author asserts that this decision shifted the conceptual framework from a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/churches-that-bless-gay-marriage-victimize-children\/\" title=\"Churches That Bless ... Victimize Children\">male-female union<\/a> to an &#8220;inclusive&#8221; model that undermines the inherent meanings of both marriage and family. <\/p>\n<p>Critics are pointedly concerned that the ruling contributed to a broader societal movement that de-sexes family structures, making gender distinctions optional and diminishing the significance of motherhood and fatherhood. This viewpoint suggests that children are deprived of their right to the love of both parents, and prioritizes adult desires over children&#8217;s needs. <\/p>\n<p>Moreover, the piece contends that the decision fails to protect women&#8217;s roles within family structures, arguing that it normalizes family dynamics that can obscure and negate the value of femininity. The author critiques the ruling as being legally flawed, suggesting it contradicts constitutional principles and highlights concerns about its implications for personal liberties. <\/p>\n<p>The text concludes that *Obergefell* has led to a societal ethos that disregards the importance of gender in marriage and family life, positing that it should be overturned to restore clarity to these foundational human institutions.  <\/p>\n<p class=\"readmore\">\n    <button onclick=\"showReadMore()\" id=\"readmorebtn\">Read more&#8230;<\/button>\n<\/p>\n<hr id=\"line\">\n<span id=\"more\"><\/p>\n<div>\n<p>June 26 marks the 10th anniversary of the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision in <a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/576\/14-556\/case.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>Obergefell v. Hodges<\/em><\/a>  that radically redefined the ageless and cross-cultural definition of marriage and the family. Both are no longer about bringing together the two complementary halves of humanity &mdash; male and female &mdash; in an essential, cooperative, life-producing union. Marriage and family are now &ldquo;inclusive,&rdquo; and that&rsquo;s the problem.<\/p>\n<p><em>Obergefell<\/em> embarked us on yet another vast, untested experiment with marriage &mdash; and it is not going well.<\/p>\n<p>Of course, the push for &ldquo;gay marriage&rdquo; was never just about marriage. It was always about de-sexing the family and society. If the essential qualities of male and female are optional for marriage and the family, both become effectively meaningless everywhere else. They are mere preferences.<\/p>\n<p>This happened more quickly than anyone imagined. No one should miss the fact that there was no daylight whatsoever between the nationalization of gay marriage and the launch of the &ldquo;trans&rdquo; revolution &mdash; literally.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Bruce Jenner infamously appeared as &ldquo;Caitlyn&rdquo; on the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Vanity-Magazine-Caitlyn-Jenner-Cover\/dp\/B00ZB2P4D0\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">July 2015<\/a> cover of Vanity Fair magazine <a href=\"https:\/\/www.vanityfair.com\/hollywood\/2015\/06\/caitlyn-jenner-bruce-cover-annie-leibovitz?srsltid=AfmBOorF_TUOuDFe1XNSTEyx5DFfn7dYz5Lt6aL1o-EC96SA5BCefky6\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">hours before<\/a> <em>Obergefell<\/em> was handed down. These two developments are ideologically and consecutively linked like railway cars. (Never mind that Jenner is now apostate to the &ldquo;trans&rdquo; movement for <a href=\"https:\/\/www.advocate.com\/transgender\/caitlyn-jenner-trans-not-women\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">admitting in 2023<\/a> that &ldquo;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/aclu-lawyer-invents-absurd-new-term-to-describe-women-non-transgender\/\" title=\"ACLU Lawyer Invents Absurd New Term to Describe Women: \u2018Non-Trans...\u2019\">transgender women&#038;rdquo<\/a>; aren&rsquo;t really women. What was once radical quickly becomes retrograde because the boundaries keep radicalizing.)<\/p>\n<p>Gay &ldquo;marriage&rdquo; was never about &ldquo;marriage equality.&rdquo; It was always about redefinition. The <a href=\"https:\/\/amzn.to\/3YuVZYV\" >terribly clever term &#038;ldquo<\/a>;marriage equality&rdquo; was a <a href=\"https:\/\/www.academia.edu\/115565324\/The_Rise_Toward_So_Called_Marriage_Equality_Past_and_Present\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">strategic messaging development<\/a> to win sympathy for a novel idea that the petitioners in <em>Obergefell <\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/supreme.justia.com\/cases\/federal\/us\/576\/14-556\/case.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">admitted<\/a> no society had permitted before 2001. This sympathy is precisely what swayed Justice Kennedy, the sole deciding vote in a highly contested decision. He authored the majority opinion, breathlessly expressing a wholly new understanding of marriage:<\/p>\n<blockquote>\n<p>The nature of marriage is that, through its enduring bond, two persons together can find other freedoms, such as expression, intimacy, and spirituality. This is true for all persons, whatever their sexual orientation.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<p>So-called gay marriage was always about redefining and de-sexing the family, which Justice Kennedy so cleverly did with his assumptive leap that marriage is about &ldquo;two persons&rdquo; and not the male-female union he earlier admitted &ldquo;has existed for millennia and across civilizations &hellip; [s]ince the dawn of history.&rdquo;<\/p>\n<p>This is the first reason why citizens must call for the overturning of <em>Obergefell<\/em>. It deconstructs and neuters our understanding of humanity. This is precisely what happens when a society shifts its conception of the irreplaceable human institution of the family to say its most essential dynamic parts &mdash; male and female &mdash; are now no longer required because members of the same sex will work just as well. Of course, they cannot, but that logical impossibility is exactly what <em>Obergefell<\/em> demands.<\/p>\n<p>The second reason <em>Obergefell<\/em> should be overturned is that it says children have no fundamental right to be loved and cared for by their own mother and father. This is a fundamental human injustice. Every same-sex family, by definition and design, denies every child it contains the maternal or paternal love they naturally seek and require. But <em>Obergefell <\/em>says the right of adults to form sexless families is more real than the child&rsquo;s right to his own mother or father. This turns nature on its head by elevating the experimental wants of adults above the natural needs of children. That is never moral.<\/p>\n<p>Third, <em>Obergefell<\/em> fails to protect women by dismissing the essential quality and character of the feminine. It does this by requiring all of us to consent to an impossibility. We must all admit, or object to no effect, that a family headed by two males does everything and meets every need that a woman as wife and mother can. This effectively negates the meaningfulness of the feminine. (The lesbian family does the same to the masculine.) That is why it was no leap at all for men to start invading women&rsquo;s bathrooms, locker rooms, dorms, and sporting competitions on the heels of <em>Obergefell<\/em>. This move ushered in &ldquo;misogyny on steroids,&rdquo; as liberal author Kara Dansky puts it in her book <a href=\"https:\/\/www.abebooks.com\/9781637582299\/Abolition-Sex-%2525E2%252580%25259CTransgender%2525E2%252580%25259D-Agenda-Harms-1637582293\/plp\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\"><em>The Abolition of Sex<\/em><\/a>. Anyone who doesn&rsquo;t get this doesn&rsquo;t get <a href=\"https:\/\/www.rutgersuniversitypress.org\/queering-marriage\/9780813562216\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noreferrer noopener\">queer theory<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Fourth, <em>Obergefell<\/em> is based on bad law. As Justice Clarence Thomas so properly explained in his dissent to the majority opinion in <em>Obergefell<\/em>, &ldquo;The Court&rsquo;s decision today is at odds not only with the Constitution, but with the principles upon which our Nation was built.&rdquo; He noted a fact that is indisputable: &ldquo;[T]he majority invokes our Constitution in the name of a &lsquo;liberty&rsquo; that the Framers would not have recognized, to the detriment of the liberty they sought to protect.&rdquo; <\/p>\n<p>The Constitution provides no right to so radically change and redefine an essential human institution that predates any <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/desantis-signs-bill-granting-injured-police-dogs-the-right-to-ride-in-ambulances\/\" title=\"DeSantis Signs Bill Granting Injured Police Dogs The Right To Ride In Ambulances\">human law<\/a>. Justice Thomas was correct in stating, &ldquo;By straying from the text of the Constitution, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/watch-chicago-mayor-lori-lightfoot-screams-f-clarence-thomas\/\" title=\"WATCH: Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot Screams, \u2018F*** Clarence Thomas\u2019\">substantive due process exalts judges<\/a> at the expense of the People from whom they derive their authority.&rdquo; <em>Obergefell<\/em>, just like <em>Roe v. Wade<\/em> before it, is radically bad law because it is extra-constitutional.&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Thomas&rsquo; prediction that &ldquo;the majority&rsquo;s inversion of the original meaning of liberty will likely cause collateral damage to other aspects of our constitutional order that protect liberty&rdquo; came true faster than he or anyone else imagined. Ask any woman who has had to endure the indignity of sharing a winner&rsquo;s platform, locker room, or jail cell with a man.<\/p>\n<p>When we say men and women don&rsquo;t matter for marriage and the family, we say they have no objective meaning at all. That is exactly what <em>Obergefell<\/em> has wrought and why it must be overturned.<\/p>\n<hr>\n<p>      Glenn T. Stanton is the director of family formation studies at Focus on the Family and the author of &#8220;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.amazon.com\/Myth-Dying-Church-Christianity-Actually\/dp\/1683973054\/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_1?keywords=glenn+t.+stanton%2C+myth+of+the+dying+church&amp;qid=1555530762&amp;s=gateway&amp;sr=8-1-fkmrnull\">The Myth of the Dying Church<\/a>.&#8221;<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>June 26 marks a decade since Obergefell v. Hodges redefined marriage and family, moving away from the traditional male-female union<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3705,"featured_media":2452442,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mo_disable_npp":"","fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Man-in-Suit-and-Woman-Floral.jpg","fifu_image_alt":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[33651],"tags":[27702,6994,32275],"class_list":["post-2452441","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-western-journal","tag-obergefell","tag-scotus","tag-supreme-court"],"fifu_image_url":"https:\/\/thefederalist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/Man-in-Suit-and-Woman-Floral.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2452441","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3705"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2452441"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2452441\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2452450,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2452441\/revisions\/2452450"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/2452442"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2452441"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2452441"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.conservativenewsdaily.net\/breaking-news\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2452441"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}