Shawnee County GOP used fear, misinformation in attempt to stop Respect for Marriage Act
Article - about 5 minutes
On Tuesday, December 13, NPR published an article titled, ‘Biden signs Respect for Marriage Act, reflecting his and the country's evolution’. For weeks, Republicans across the country were warning people of the coming “dangers” of the Respect for Marriage Act.
On November 15 and again on November 29, Shawnee County GOP sent out an email listing everything the bill would do.
There are a few bullet points above that are blatantly inaccurate including bullet points 3, 6, and 7. Furthermore, the majority of these other bullet points are arguably misleading. So, let’s breakdown the claims for each bullet point.
Makes same-sex marriage a federal law.
Ҥ 7. Marriage
“(a) For the purposes of any Federal law, rule, or regulation in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is between 2 individuals and is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is between 2 individuals and is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State.”
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is misleading. A state still has the option of making gay marriage legal or illegal, but must recognize the union of a gay couple that was married in another state where it was legal for the couple to get married.
Forces government employees to comply and does not provide any conscious or religious exemption.
SEC. 6. NO IMPACT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CONSCIENCE.
(a) In General.—Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to diminish or abrogate a religious liberty or conscience protection otherwise available to an individual or organization under the Constitution of the United States or Federal law.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is, at the very least, misleading.
Does not provide religious exemption for anyone or any entity.
SEC. 6. NO IMPACT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY AND CONSCIENCE.
(b) Goods Or Services.—Consistent with the First Amendment to the Constitution, nonprofit religious organizations, including churches, mosques, synagogues, temples, nondenominational ministries, interdenominational and ecumenical organizations, mission organizations, faith-based social agencies, religious educational institutions, and nonprofit entities whose principal purpose is the study, practice, or advancement of religion, and any employee of such an organization, shall not be required to provide services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges for the solemnization or celebration of a marriage. Any refusal under this subsection to provide such services, accommodations, advantages, facilities, goods, or privileges shall not create any civil claim or cause of action.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is false.
Removes state sovereignty respecting marriage and requires states to recognize another state’s marriage law even if it is contrary to the state’s own law.
Ҥ 7. Marriage
“(a) For the purposes of any Federal law, rule, or regulation in which marital status is a factor, an individual shall be considered married if that individual’s marriage is between 2 individuals and is valid in the State where the marriage was entered into or, in the case of a marriage entered into outside any State, if the marriage is between 2 individuals and is valid in the place where entered into and the marriage could have been entered into in a State.
“(b) In this section, the term ‘State’ means a State, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any other territory or possession of the United States.
“(c) For purposes of subsection (a), in determining whether a marriage is valid in a State or the place where entered into, if outside of any State, only the law of the jurisdiction applicable at the time the marriage was entered into may be considered.”.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is true.
Requires a state to give legal recognition to another state’s marriage laws, and this is not limited to same-sex marriage.
Ҥ 1738C. Certain acts, records, and proceedings and the effect thereof
“(a) In General.—No person acting under color of State law may deny—
“(1) full faith and credit to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State pertaining to a marriage between 2 individuals, on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals; or
“(2) a right or claim arising from such a marriage on the basis that such marriage would not be recognized under the law of that State on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin of those individuals.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is true.
This portion of the bill will expand child bride marriages, where a state like California has no age limit.
This bill only protects individuals on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. States will not be forced to recognize individuals considered “underage” by their own laws.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is false.
Combined with same-sex marriage, child bride marriages—between a much older man and a younger girl—will include male-male and female-female child marriages.
This bill only protects individuals on the basis of the sex, race, ethnicity, or national origin. States will not be forced to recognize individuals considered “underage” by their own laws.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is false.
HR 8404 does not expressly prevent one person with a spouse in two states from requiring a third state to give legal recognition to both.
SEC. 7. STATUTORY PROHIBITION.
(b) No Federal Recognition Of Polygamous Marriages.—Nothing in this Act, or any amendment made by this Act, shall be construed to require or authorize Federal recognition of marriages between more than 2 individuals.
The claim made by the Shawnee County GOP is false.
With six of their eight claims being false or misleading, the Shawnee County GOP were one of many groups of Republicans that took part in alarmism, spreading false information in an attempt to stop the Respect for Marriage Act which became public law Tuesday, December 13, 2022.