Make no mistake. It's currently gay marriage, too.
The U.S. Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in 2015, but in most states, laws or constitutional amendments would revive the prohibition if the high court decides, as it did with abortion, that such unions are not a constitutionally protected right.
Thirty-five states ban same-sex marriage in their constitutions, state law, or both, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures and Stateline research. All were invalidated in 2015 by the Obergefell v. Hodges ruling. But should the now-more-conservative U.S. Supreme Court overturn the right to same-sex marriages, those state laws and constitutional amendments would kick in.
“These constitutional amendments are still on the books and would likely be put in place,” said Jason Pierceson, a political science professor at the University of Illinois, Springfield and author of “Same-Sex Marriage in the United States: The Road to the Supreme Court and Beyond. Most of them would arguably be in effect if the court overturns Obergefell.”
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/stateline/2022/07/07/without-obergefell-most-states-would-have-same-sex-marriage-bans
And this is the problem. There is no line. It's like asking for the line drawn at the bottom of a tidal ocean. This is a gray area, values change and evolve with the times. And not in a bad, circling-the-drain kind of way. Women can wear pants now. We don't consider black people partly human. We don't segregate boys and girls at school.
Where's the line? If it's about preserving, maintaining, stasis and inertia, then it's conservatism. If it seeks to reach beyond the next hill or improve upon or usher in, then it's progressive. There's no moral judgment to either word; both are necessary under certain circumstances.
