I don’t get why a such law took so long, but late is better than never.
Wow, MISSOURI did that???
MISSOURI??!??
I’m thinking the tipping point has been reached, the pendulum is now moving away from conservatism, and we’ll see little upsets like this as rural states begin to shift back. Missouri is facing a hell of a medicaid cut which they can’t afford, that may ripple for a while.
Unfortunately they have short memory spans but eventually they’ll flip for a generation, like the New Deal era. People will just give up on MAGA and go the other way.
No they wont. They’ll continue to blame others and refuse to accept responsibility. There will be no pendulum swing because they will keep reinforcing themselves through radical fascist media expansion.
I’ll be deep in the cold, cold ground before I recognize Missouri.
Republican men are probably throwing a fit that they won’t be able to legally groom and rape children for “family values” anymore
This is a new article from 1800, right? right?
deleted by creator
Abolish Marriage.
We don’t need the state or religious authorities dictating our relationships.
Amen, brother.
Need to do something for stuff like inheritance and visitation rights that’s currently coupled (pun intended) to marriage.
National Emergency Contact Database. Sign a piece of paper together to make each other emergency contacts in the eyes of the govt. have as many as you’d like!
Well in my ideal view we would abolish the state and abolish capitalism, so those things aren’t too much of an issue.
That would solve many problems, but stuff like “Who gets to visit you in the hospital?” and “who gets your personal belongings when you expire?” might need some thought. There are likely easy to solve, but still require some thought.
A will amd Power of Attorney do those without marriage. I’ve been with my partner for 15 years, unmarried, and haven’t had a problem with it yet.
I was in a car accident and spent two weeks unconcious in the ICU, so its not like its untested either.
True but a will and power of attourney are also more complicated and expensive to get
Cmopared to standard marriage, are they any better or just extra steps
Nope, you can get the forms online for free.
That’s the role of the de facto union. But the civil union usually grants you special conditions, along with your spouse.
The year is 2025…
And America is still this ass backwards.
Least some good news for once.
About fucking time you backasswards rednecks
Bet Republicans are furious
Checked if this was an Onion type article. So glad it isn’t.
Rep. Hardy Billington, R-Poplar Bluff, was among the few who spoke against the bill, arguing that barring pregnant teenagers from getting married would increase abortion rates.
“We all claim to be pro-life here in the body,” Billington said. “Now we’re going to vote on this bill where babies are going to die.”
Disgusting. What a pitiful excuse to enable the trafficking of children. I’m ashamed to live here. There’s no fucking guarantee that it would even increase abortion rate, this guy is a closeted pedophile looking out for his ilk.
Apparently he’s been spouting this bullshit for at least the past year. Not to mention he’s also a homophobe.
Sounds like an old guy from the 50s, who still clings to 50s social mores and stigmas, unaware that being a single mother isn’t the massive taboo he remembers it being.
Checks Hardy Billington’s Wikipedia page
Born 1952 or 1953 (age 71–72)
Aaaaaand there we have it. Not sure why his exact birthdate isn’t known. In fact the only notable thing on that page is about him expressing opposition to another child marriage bill that was proposed last year. Imagine having “strongly endorses child marriage” as the one and only legacy from your 70+ years of life. Gross.
It’s okay because there’s an R next to his name. It wouldn’t shock me if people were fully aware of his views. The abortion argument works for women here and the men here were sold at “child marriage.”
That’s a good take. The generational difference is real, that good old shotgun wedding from the past.
Most likely he has just never revealed his birthday to the public to Wikipedia is just guessing on the year.
Well, glad I married off my daughter at 14 last year. Knew that was a good decision
My other wives are very happy with their new sister-wife, thank you for your spawn. The dowry is in the mail.
Shipping costs on 4.5 bags of funyuns probably wasn’t that bad.
Still allowed in a lot of US states
“Do you know any kids who have been married at age 12? I do. And guess what? They’re still married,” Moon said in response to questioning by Democratic state Representative Peter Merideth.
Child brides aren’t old enough to divorce their husbands.
Old enough to marry but too young to divorce. That’s the stupidest thing I’ve heard this week.
That’s the point - the power imbalance. Marry off young girls to men who can groom and control them. Daddy-husbands and child-wives. The Christian complementarian model sees women as essentially children anyway. Like Moon’s comment implies - if they marry you off at 12, you are never getting the independence to escape.
The new Pope’s from the US.
This was allowed before?!
Watch the Republicans set their hair on fire in response while introducing legislation to allow more child workers as well.
The party of family values.
Most US states allow it with parental consent.
In theory it’s a holdover from times when age based consent was crazy liberal ideology, which for most of the red states means like 1990.
And if it fails, you know whoever voted for it to not pass is a child predator. Hopefully there’s a list of people who voted “no” on it that gets leaked so people, especially parents, know who to cut contact with.
I mean, basically every Republican legislature or executive is a child predator. It’s like a prerequisite to join the party. Their ratings don’t drop when they’re exposed.
to think they project conspiracy theories saying the left is full of satanist pedos.
its kind of impressive how effective their brainwashing is. they got hardcore into the heads of their electorate.
Hopefully there’s a list of people who voted “no” on it that gets leaked
There is no need for leaks, it’s right in the article:
The final version of the bill passed the House by a vote of 129-14, with one member voting present. In the Senate, it passed by a vote of 32-1. Sen. Mike Moon, R-Ash Grove, was the only vote against.
I get where you’re coming from but leaking a list of names and how they voted is a terrible thought.
Voting choices of individual citizens over political matters and selection of representatives? sure, 100% should always be anonymous to avoid discrimination and political violence.
But this are representatives on an assembly, making legislation. Their votes are, as they correctly should be, 100% always public. It’s the way constituencies can keep representatives accountable for their actions.
You’re right. I was thinking about private citizens but that’s not the situation on this one.
