Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

For employees, a job is about more than just the paycheck—elements like work-life balance, career development and a positive <keyword id="20375714" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="workplace-environment" source="keywords">workplace environment</keyword> play crucial roles. This broader perspective extends to a national level too, with highly <keyword id="20614079" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="skilled-professionals" source="keywords">skilled professionals</keyword> increasingly drawn to countries that offer a more inclusive and progressive atmosphere. A recent study from Washington State University underscores this notion, revealing that European countries which embraced <keyword id="20026331" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="same-sex-marriage" source="keywords">same-sex marriage</keyword> saw a significant boost in retaining their top talent. This shift had considerable economic repercussions, particularly in influencing the flow of skilled workers to the United States. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Uncovering the link between marriage equality and skilled labour retention" comment="subhead" text="Uncovering the link between marriage equality and skilled labour retention">Uncovering the link between <keyword id="1660336" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="marriage-equality" source="Orion">marriage equality</keyword> and <keyword id="22603926" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="skilled-labour-retention" source="Orion">skilled labour retention</keyword></cmsannotation> The study, recently published in AEA Papers and Proceedings, analysed 20 years of data on H-1B visas—those coveted permits for immigrants with advanced degrees and specialised skills. The research team’s choice to focus on EU countries was a strategic one, leveraging the shared labour market within this political and economic union for a more precise analysis of marriage equality’s effects. The EU also provided a natural experiment: by 2019, roughly half of the 27 member states had legalised same-sex marriage, while the remaining 14 had not, creating a perfect control group for comparison. The results revealed that from 2000 to 2019, as 13 EU countries adopted same-sex marriage laws, the U.S. experienced a 21% decline in new H-1B visas from these countries. This trend persisted despite differences in enactment dates and economic conditions across the EU. The study also considered the effect of the U.S. recognising foreign same-sex marriages in 2013. Notably, this policy change slowed the decrease in H-1B visa admissions from EU countries with existing marriage equality laws, such as The Netherlands, Belgium and Spain. Koroles Awad, a Ph.D. candidate in economics at WSU, emphasised that <keyword id="21934841" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="inclusive-policies" source="keywords">inclusive policies</keyword> make countries more attractive to skilled labour. This finding underscores the broader economic benefits of marriage equality beyond just social progress. Awad further noted that marriage equality could act as a non-monetary incentive for attracting and retaining highly sought-after skilled workers, particularly in STEM fields. Building on previous U.S. studies showing that same-sex couples and households led by women were more likely to relocate to states recognising same-sex marriage, this new research broadens the understanding of how inclusive policies affect migration patterns. Although this study doesn’t address the sexual orientation of H-1B visa holders, it clearly indicates that the appeal of inclusive environments is a significant factor for skilled professionals.

Inclusivity pays off: Countries with same-sex marriage retain skilled professionals more effectively, per study

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Support for same-sex marriage continues to fall among Republicans, new Gallup polling shows.</li><li>Overall support for same-sex marriage has seemingly plateaued at about 70%.</li></ul>Support for same-sex marriage among Republicans <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/majority-of-republicans-now-call-same-sex-relations-immoral-gallup-2023-6">continues to slide.</a>In <a target="_blank" href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/646202/sex-relations-marriage-supported.aspx">new polling from Gallup</a>, just 46% of Republicans said marriages between same-sex couples should be recognized as legally valid.That's down from 49% last year. Support for same-sex marriage peaked at 55% among Republicans in 2021 and 2022.Just 40% of Republicans said that same-sex marriage is morally acceptable. That's a minor change from last year but represents a steep drop from 2022 when 56% of Republicans answered in the affirmative.Gallup's polling has found that overall support for the legality of same-sex marriage in America has hovered at about 70% since 2021, largely plateauing after years of steady increase.In many ways, 2022 was a high watermark for GOP support of same-sex marriage.That year, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/which-republican-senators-vote-for-same-sex-marriage-codification-bill-2022-11">12 Republican senators</a> and <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/house-passes-same-sex-marriage-bill-again-less-gop-support-2022-12">39 House Republicans</a> voted for the Respect for Marriage Act, a bill that protected same-sex marriage amid concerns about the practice's standing after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote in a concurring opinion to the ruling that overturned Roe that he believed the court's precedent on same-sex marriage <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/justice-thomas-said-the-court-should-reconsider-rulings-on-same-sex-marriage-2022-6">should be revisited</a>.Since then, Republicans have waged a culture war against portions of the LGBTQ+ movement, focusing in particular on <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republican-senators-jd-vance-criminalize-transgender-care-minors-2023-7">access to gender-affirming care</a> for transgender people.At times, that movement has spilled over into broader attacks on Pride Month and gay people in general."I think people are conflating same-sex rights with transgender rights, and they are very different issues," Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, one of the Republicans who voted for the same-sex-marriage bill, <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republican-approval-gay-relationships-decline-senators-conflation-trans-2023-6">told Business Insider</a> last year.Mike Johnson, who has a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/charles-moran-log-cabin-republicans-mike-johnson-lgbtq-2023-11">history of opposition to LGBTQ+ rights</a>, was elected speaker by House Republicans last fall. One of the three speaker candidates who failed to win before him — Rep. Tom Emmer of Minnesota — lost in part due to his <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tom-emmers-pro-gay-marriage-vote-may-have-cost-him-the-speakership-2023-10">support for the Respect for Marriage Act.</a>Yet Johnson hasn't taken aim at same-sex marriage in his new position, and over the weekend, he campaigned for a gay Republican candidate in a New York swing seat.

GOP support for same-sex marriage keeps dropping

<ul><li>Two <keyword id="6371692" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="partners" source="Orion">partners</keyword> can open a joint account as long as they have the necessary documentation in place. </li><li>The absence of legal recognition for same-sex marriages in the country renders joint applications for LGBTQ <keyword id="6372479" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="couples" source="Orion">couples</keyword> impossible. </li><li>The separation and death of the partner will not confer any special rights on any of the partners.</li></ul>In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court refused to give <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/same-sex-marriage-verdict-cji-says-parliament-needs-to-effect-changes-in-law/articleshow/104488235.cms">legal recognition to same sex marriages</a> and asked the Parliament to look into the Special <keyword id="6355896" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="marriage" source="Orion">Marriage</keyword> Act regarding this. However, the apex court did instruct the Union, state and UT governments to ensure that the community is not discriminated against. This brings up the question about the financial rights of LGBTQ couples. As these couples grapple with legal and societal hurdles, comprehending and securing their financial rights has become a priority. We take a look into the legal and financial aspects of LGBTQ couples. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Opening a joint bank account" comment="Subhead" text="Opening a joint bank account">Opening a joint bank account</cmsannotation> There is no bar for opening joint accounts. “Any two individuals can open a joint account together, regardless of their relationship status. Most banks will also allow you to open FDs jointly,” says Adhil Shetty, CEO, BankBazaar, a financial marketplace. Hence, two partners can open a joint account as long as they have the necessary documentation in place, as RBI does not discriminate in terms of gender when it comes to opening and operating accounts. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Joint home and car loans" comment="Subhead" text="Joint home and car loans">Joint home and car loans</cmsannotation> You cannot apply for a <keyword id="6354730" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="home-loan" source="Orion">home loan</keyword> jointly. “If one wants to apply for a home loan jointly, one of the mandatory requirements is proof of relationship – which is to be provided irrespective of the joint applicant being a partner, a parent, a child, or siblings. In the case of a couple, a marriage certificate is required,” says Anny Ghosh, Senior Consultant, Alpha Capital, a wealth management firm. Basically, the absence of legal recognition for same-sex marriages in the country renders joint applications for LGBTQ couples impossible. “Many banks and financial institutions are working on putting policies in place, but the progress is slow in the absence of clear directives from the regulatory and legal bodies,” says Shetty. Not just for home loans, this is applicable to any loan to be taken jointly. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Financial implications of adopting children" comment="Subhead" text="Financial implications of adopting children">Financial implications of adopting children</cmsannotation> The law does not prohibit adoption based on sexual orientation. “However, LGBTQ members will be able to adopt as a couple if same-sex union gets legalised in India as live-in couples are not yet permitted to adopt a child in the country, " says Ghosh. Therefore, any child adopted by them will be the child of either of them who is recognised as the adopting parent. “This effectively means that for the purposes of inheritance and succession, the child will be recognized as the child of only one of them. The other partner will have to perforce confer the benefits of inheritance on the child through will,” says Mani Gupta, partner, Sarthak Advocates &amp; Solicitor, a full service law firm. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Financial implications of separation and death" comment="Subhead" text="Financial implications of separation and death">Financial implications of separation and death</cmsannotation> The separation and death of the partner will not confer any special rights on any of the partners. “This means that the surviving partner in case of death will not get any inheritance benefits unless such benefit has been conferred through will,” says Gupta. Upon separation, none of the partners will be entitled to maintenance or alimony from the other. Retirement and pensionary benefits of one will not flow to the other partner. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Inheritance and property rights" comment="Subhead" text="Inheritance and property rights">Inheritance and property rights</cmsannotation> The judgement effectively maintains the status quo on the inheritance and property rights. “This means that LGBTQ couples would not be able to claim to be spouses of each other, and therefore, would normally not be able to claim benefits of intestate succession (i.e. on account of death without a will),” says Gupta. The couple may, however, confer the benefits of inheritance by inheritance through a will.

Same sex marriages are still not legal – A look at the financial rights of LGBTQ couples

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Some young people are considering a "lavender marriage" over a traditional relationship.</li><li>Lavender marriages historically helped conceal sexual orientation, but Gen Zers are redefining it.</li></ul>For many young people right now, the <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/dating-apps-find-love-romance-online-tinder-match-total-scam-2024-10">dating scene is rough</a>, their families are far away, and <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/high-rent-costs-renters-rental-housing-market-affordability-income-prices-2024-5">housing is expensive</a>.To share the load, some are opening up applications for "lavender marriages" — something that was once the preserve of the LGBTQ+ community.The term was originally coined in the early 20th to describe a union between a man and a woman in which one or both partners are homosexual or bisexual.It was meant to provide a facade for those who wanted to hide their sexuality from wider society.But lavender marriages have made a resurgence on social media in recent months among Gen Zers who are tired of being broke, single, <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tiktokers-are-documenting-the-epidemic-of-loneliness-2023-4">and lonely</a>. Some videos with the hashtag #lavendermarriage on TikTok have amassed <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGdeFu9BW/">millions of views</a> on the platform.Robbie Scott, a TikToker and musician with 300,000 followers, recently posted a video asking for "applications for a lavender marriage" because he wanted to live with someone so he could afford mortgage payments, utilities, and taxes."You can mess around with whoever you want, whenever you want, I don't care," he said in the video, which has received <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://vm.tiktok.com/ZGdeYrKj4/">more than five million views</a>. "In fact, I encourage it. Have fun. Live your best life."<h2 id="1c4be94f-a91b-485c-9850-ac0905f2ba7c">A modern-day lavender marriage</h2>Traditionally, a lavender marriage was just that — a legally binding marriage.Edward Reese, a gender and sexuality expert at the LGBTQ+ dating app Taimi, told Business Insider that this can still be true. It can bring benefits such as inheritance rights, childcare, tax breaks, better mortgage rates, and primary care if one of you gets ill."People can do it in case one or both partners don't have family or have gone no contact, and their lavender spouse becomes not only their best friend but a legal family member," he said.But the modern version of a lavender marriage could also simply be a spoken agreement between two people to live their lives like a married couple, without the sex.This is different from having a roommate, Reese added, who can move out of a shared household any minute, whenever they choose."The couple in the lavender marriage is expected to get through all the conflicts, discuss and compromise," he said. "It's a union with commitment, love, and loyalty, and all of these can be not romantic."Christine DeVore, a licensed clinical psychologist who is the director of adult and couples services at Birch Psychology, told BI that a lavender marriage offers a practical solution to some of life's burdens."It's a way to ease financial stress while still being independent," she said.While somewhat tongue-in-cheek, Scott's video on TikTok prompted other Gen Zers to share their thoughts. They said lavender marriages were "<a target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@a_literal_crab_rangoon/video/7421015761826663722">looking more appealing by the day</a>" and that the agreement might be what they "<a target="_blank" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@afreakingmaya/video/7375348974997523758">really need</a>."Several older viewers commented, saying they had given lavender marriages a try and were happier than ever.<div type="image" title="Couple holding hands, wearing wedding rings, on their wedding day." height="2574" width="3861" msid="114123013" hostid="261" sizebytes="164894"></div>Sofie Roos, a licensed sexologist, relationship therapist, and sexual health expert who writes for the sex-positive magazine <a target="_blank" href="https://passionerad.se/">Passionerad</a>, added that there are many other benefits to a lavender marriage, including physical touch and comfort.She said benefits can include "cuddling in front of a TV show or when reading a book, sleeping together, and providing physical support and safety when needed.""Just as in every marriage, you feel safe with the person," Roos added. "Even though no attraction is involved, you can gain much more from being physically close to your lavender married partner than being close to a friend or to a one-night stand."<h2 id="0b761dc2-b1a7-47c3-8360-c29646ae62d2">A deeper issue</h2>It's unclear exactly how many lavender marriages are taking place, and to what extent the conversations on TikTok reflect a wider trend. But they do hint at more serious societal issues.Dating is still big business. Dating companies generated more than <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/dating-apps-find-love-romance-online-tinder-match-total-scam-2024-10">$5 billion</a> in 2023 alone. Match Group generated annual revenues of more than $3.4 billion, while Bumble had revenues of $1.1 billion last year.But growth appears to be slowing. Match Group's paying users fell by around 6% in the first quarter of the year. It is now valued at $9.51 billion, down from $50 billion in 2021. Meanwhile, Bumble's value has fallen by around 90% since it went public in 2021. It is now worth around $822 million.That may be because Gen Zers are <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-dating-trend-online-apps-friends-romantic-partners-relationships-2023-3">turning away from </a>dating apps, with some thinking the apps now miss the point of what made them fun in the first place — <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tinder-hinge-okcupid-operator-match-sued-making-dating-apps-addictive-2024-2">going after profits</a> rather than real connections.Others are tired of modern dating culture, with <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/fancy-first-date-no-connection-ghosted-2023-8">ghosting</a>, catfishing, and some prospective partners not showing up to dates at all.One creator, Cleopatra, who is 23, told BI that what really appealed to her is the community aspect, where women can live without fear of being hurt or abused."I think the majority want change," Cleopatra said. "This patriarchal lifestyle, these gender roles, are becoming exhausting, to say the least.""The dating pool is certainly full of shit," she added.She said the financial stability the arrangement could offer was also definitely a draw, particularly given <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/gen-z-millennials-housing-costs-insurance-debt-election-trump-biden-2024-6">Zoomers have more debt</a> and are paying more for housing than millennials did a decade ago.According to a recent <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/dating-apps-find-love-romance-online-tinder-match-total-scam-2024-10">Washington Post</a> analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data, Gen Z is spending 31% more on housing costs compared to what millennials paid 10 years ago, a figure which also factors in inflation.The Post analysis said that car insurance costs increased more than twofold for Americans aged 16 to 24 between 2012 and 2022, and health insurance costs spiked 46% for this group during the same time span.That has led some to consider "<a target="_blank" href="https://nypost.com/2023/12/13/lifestyle/i-want-an-inflationship-lets-live-sexless-and-financially-free-in-the-same-bed/">inflationships</a>" — living in the same room, in the same bed, without having sex. Lavender marriages could just be furthering this trend.<h2 id="d50f74e2-7f51-4604-8646-2d542838f5a1">Boundaries are important</h2>For young people who are reconsidering how to approach relationships, a lavender marriage "can be a great replacement," Reese said. People are more commonly discovering they are aromantic or asexual, he added, which questions the pop culture norm of focusing on straight sex and love for so long.There are challenges, however. DeVore and Roos warned that emotional complexities can arise from such entanglements, and open communication about boundaries and feelings is vital for it to work.For example, the rules of a lavender marriage may be vague, meaning there could be the potential for upset down the line. Partners may disagree on what is allowed outside the relationship and what isn't and have different ideas of what defines cheating.Roos said this is when lavender marriages can show their weak side, triggering feelings of jealousy and sadness if one partner starts feeling left out.The arrangement may also not suit both people forever, such as if one decides to pursue a romantic relationship."What felt OK when talking things through before, or at the beginning, of the marriage, might therefore, later on not feel OK at all," Roos said.Ultimately, she said challenges and conflicts can arise even in the most committed partnerships, DeVore said."While a lavender marriage may offer certain advantages, it does not guarantee a lifetime of happiness and fulfillment," she said."It's important to remember that no relationship, including a lavender marriage, is immune to heartache."

For Gen Zers tired of dating, applications for lavender marriages are open

<ul class="summary-list"><li>A GOP House candidate in Maryland opposed mandating insurance coverage for IVF for same-sex couples.</li><li>Then-Delegate Neil Parrott said it would create a "false sense of equality" for those couples.</li></ul>As Maryland's annual legislative session drew to a close in 2015, then-Delegate Neil Parrott spoke out against a bill that would require insurance companies in the state to cover in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatments from married, same-sex couples.Parrott called the bill "shockingly bad" in an <a target="_blank" href="https://us2.campaign-archive.com/?u=fac7efbc0801875f99034b204&amp;id=0c0bc8b111&amp;e=e13fa7b846">email newsletter to constituents</a>, arguing not only that it would drive up premium costs, but that it would be harmful to the children who were born into families with two mothers."This sort of social engineering and fiscally irresponsible law-making, solely for the pleasure of adults without any regard for the children that will grow up in these situations, is reprehensible," Parrot wrote at the time. "What homosexuals cannot do naturally, the General Assembly has now mandated must be provided by all insurance plans, creating a false sense of equality, with little to no regard for the children who will be negatively affected."Parrot is now the GOP nominee for Maryland's 6th congressional district and will face April McClain Delaney, the wife of former Rep. John Delaney, in the November election.Forecasters generally expect McClain Delaney to prevail, but the race is likely to be competitive. The seat had been held down for several cycles by Democratic Rep. David Trone, a wealthy self-funder who <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/maryland-primary-results-david-trone-angela-alsobrooks-wealth-2024-5">unsuccessfully sought</a> the state's open Senate seat this year. Parrott ran against Trone in both 2020 and 2022.Parrot told Business Insider in a statement that he is not opposed to IVF generally, but had specific concerns about the fiscal impact of the bill."I want to emphasize that I am a strong supporter of IVF," Parrot said, adding that he had "serious concerns" about the bill's "financial impact on Maryland's already strained budget and high insurance premiums.""At the time, I was deeply concerned about the budget's overall fiscal health, particularly with cuts to essential services like law enforcement and corrections, and the reduction in the state's contributions to retirement and pension funds. In this context, adding another expensive mandate seemed fiscally irresponsible," Parrot said. "It was not just about the cost of IVF treatments but about the broader impact on the state's financial stability and the well-being of all Marylanders."Parrot did not address his 2015 newsletter comment that the bill would "negatively" affect children of same-sex couples, or that it would create a "false sense of equality."The bill passed both chambers in 2015 and then-Gov. Larry Hogan, a Republican, allowed the bill to become law without signing it. Today, Maryland is one of just seven states that mandates insurance companies cover IVF treatments for same-sex couples, though <a target="_blank" href="https://stateline.org/2024/03/26/few-states-cover-fertility-treatment-for-same-sex-couples-but-that-could-be-changing/">other states</a> could soon join them. The treatment is indeed <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-much-ivf-costs-2017-6">expensive</a>, and can reach into the tens of thousands of dollars.Parrot served in the state assembly until 2023, and during his 12 years in the state's lower chamber, he was known as an opponent of LGBTQ+ rights. In 2020, he was one of just four delegates who voted against <a target="_blank" href="https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/HB0081?ys=2020RS">repealing the state's anti-sodomy law</a>, In 2022, he was the only delegate to vote against <a target="_blank" href="https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Details/HB0128?ys=2021RS">providing state-level veterans' benefits</a> to LGBTQ+ veterans who had been dishonorably discharged due to their sexual orientation. In 2012, he <a target="_blank" href="https://www.politico.com/story/2012/02/maryland-gay-marriage-opponents-try-to-overturn-it-073259">led the effort</a> to put the question to a popular referendum after the Maryland Assembly passed a bill to legalize it in 2012. Ultimately, voters narrowly voted to keep the law in place.<div type="image" title="Then-Del. Neil Parrot holding a microphone." height="1348" width="1797" msid="112410479" hostid="261" sizebytes="131986"></div>In explaining his opposition to the IVF coverage bill in 2015, Parrott argued that children born into families with mothers and fathers are more likely to succeed economically and socially. "By passing this law, we are intentionally putting a child into a "family" where a father will knowingly be absent," he wrote.He also suggested the bill could be a slippery slope toward mandating insurance companies to "cover the costs of hiring a surrogate to carry the child for male, same-sex marriages." Such laws do not yet exist in any state, though some couples have <a target="_blank" href="https://abcnews.go.com/US/lgbtq-couples-push-fertility-equality-family-building-benefits/story?id=100243800">pursued lawsuits</a> with the intention of getting insurance companies to cover those costs.More broadly, IVF treatments have become a partisan flash point in the last year, given that the treatment involves the fertilization of multiple embryos outside the womb, some of which may be discarded. In February, Alabama's Supreme Court <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-judge-rules-frozen-embryos-are-people-ivf-2024-2">ruled</a> fertilized embryos are people, leading to the temporary suspension of IVF treatments in the state.That raised questions over where Republicans stood on the issue, given their general opposition to abortion and belief that life begins at conception.A <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/house-republicans-life-at-conception-ivf-exception-2024-2">majority of House Republicans</a> have cosponsored a "life at conception" bill stating that the term "human being" includes "all stages of life, including the moment of fertilization. The bill did not include any carveout for IVF.Most Republicans have since moved to make clear that they support IVF, introducing bills designed to guarantee access to the fertility procedure. Roughly 2% of all births in the US come as the result of such treatments.While Parrot says he supports IVF, he did cast a lone protest vote against extending insurance coverage for the procedure to unmarried people in 2020."I guess for me, going to single people instead of married people, and we are going to pay for it through our health insurance dollars, I just don't think that's something we should be mandating," Parrott <a target="_blank" class="" href="https://www.wbaltv.com/article/maryland-house-passes-bill-extend-insurance-coverage-in-vitro-fertilization-unmarried-people/31135940#">told</a> WBAL. "I think it should be optional, not something we have to pay for."

A GOP House candidate opposed IVF coverage for same-sex couples, once saying it would create a 'false sense of equality'

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Mike Johnson backed Clarence Thomas' suggestion that SCOTUS "reconsider" its rulings on contraception and same-sex marriage.</li><li>"There's been some really bad law made," he said in a podcast interview unearthed by CNN's KFILE.</li></ul>House Speaker Mike Johnson backed up Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' suggestion last year that the court <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/justice-thomas-said-the-court-should-reconsider-rulings-on-same-sex-marriage-2022-6">revisit its landmark rulings on contraception and same-sex marriage</a>.<a target="_blank" href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/11/21/politics/mike-johnson-kfile-invs/index.html">CNN's KFILE</a> unearthed an audio clip this week in which Johnson said that what Thomas was "calling for is not radical.""In fact, it's the opposite of that," he added.Johnson, who is now the Speaker of the House, made the comments in a podcast interview with right-wing commentator Todd Starnes on June 24, 2022 — the same day the Supreme Court <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-abortion-decision-final-ruling-scotus-roe-v-wade-2022-6#:~:text=The%20Supreme%20Court%20overturned%20the,Friday%2C%20while%20Republicans%20celebrated%20it.">voted to overturn Roe v. Wade</a>.Thomas joined the court's other conservative justices in the 6-3 decision, a <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/abortion-data-supreme-court-overturn-roe-v-wade-womens-health-2022-7">historic and far-reaching ruling</a> that immediately gutted abortion rights in nearly half of all US states.Thomas went even further in his concurring opinion, writing that the court "should reconsider" its rulings in three landmark cases: Griswold v. Connecticut, which established the right to contraception; Lawrence v. Texas, which legalized same-sex sexual activity; and Obergefell v. Hodges, which legalized same-sex marriage.The justices, Thomas wrote, are obligated to "correct the error" established by those precedents.Appearing on Starnes' show the day that opinion was released, Johnson said that "there's been some really bad law made.""They've made a mess of our jurisprudence in this country for the last, you know, several decades," he added. "And maybe some of that needs to be cleaned up."CNN also unearthed another clip in which Johnson, a hardline conservative and longtime opponent of abortion rights, described abortion as "an American holocaust.""The reality is that Planned Parenthood and all these big abortion" providers, "they set up their clinics in inner cities," he said in a May <a target="_blank" href="https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/the-vince/mike-johnson-interview--ftQHmL6VY1/">2022 radio interview</a>. "They regard these people as easy prey. I mean, it's true."

Mike Johnson backed Clarence Thomas' suggestion that the Supreme Court 'reconsider' its rulings on contraception and same-sex marriage

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Andrea Lystrup thought her marriage was perfect, but she secretly hated sex.</li><li>She realized she had issues with desire and arousal while studying to become a therapist. </li></ul>This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Andrea Lystrup, a marriage counselor with expertise in sex therapy from Arizona. It's been edited for length and clarity.Many people who come to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/health/mental-health/sex-therapy">sex therapy</a> think they hate sex. But usually, this isn’t the case. I’ve been a marriage counselor specializing in <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/health/sex-relationships/how-important-is-sex-in-a-relationship">sexual intimacy</a> for 10 years and have worked with countless clients who feel this way. They find sex gross, dread doing it, or wish it didn’t exist — even if they are otherwise satisfied with their relationship. Of course, in some cases, the person might be <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/asexuality-living-as-asexual-person-sex-attraction-myths-person-2021-4">asexual</a> or struggle with the sensory element of sex due to neurodivergence, but this is rare. Typically it’s really a sign of something deeper, like a fear of conflict leading to disconnection in the relationship or difficulty accepting oneself as a sexual being. And these things can be worked through. Generally, I think sexual capacity and honesty go hand in hand. I know this partly because I used to <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/love-husband-but-disinterested-in-sex-therapist-advice-2021-1">hate sex</a>, but at the time, I thought my marriage was perfect. We never argued, and things felt peaceful. My husband and I both come from fairly religious and conservative backgrounds. We married young and waited until our wedding to have sex, which meant we both had a very limited understanding of sexual intimacy at the time.Growing up, I was taught that <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/partner-wont-have-sex-until-marriage-what-to-do-2019-10">sex before marriage</a> was a sin next to murder. But before I got married in 2011 at age 20, my mom gave me the advice that my most important role was to support my husband. So it was tough for me when sex went from being something shameful to something I needed to do to keep my marriage alive overnight.My husband and I got along amazingly and had great times together, but secretly I hated sex. I would do it enough to keep him happy, but I found it annoying and just wished that it wasn’t a thing.<div type="image" title="Andrea Lystrup" height="901" width="1201" msid="107949413" hostid="261"></div><h2>I used to see sex as a service I had to perform</h2>Two years into my marriage, I was studying for a master's in marriage and <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/my-daughter-quit-family-therapy-to-try-art-therapy-2022-8">family therapy</a>. As part of the program, I took a sex-therapy class, and after each lesson, my husband would ask me what I learned, and I’d tell him.It was all fairly lighthearted stuff until we got to the chapter on female desire and arousal. I remember reading it and being like, "Oh crap, I have serious arousal and desire issues." I waited a few days to reveal that one to him. The class made me realize that despite not diagnostically fitting into the asexuality category, because as a teenager, I was very interested in being aroused, I essentially <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/what-its-like-to-be-asexual-2015-9">felt asexual</a>, which wasn’t normal. I had no desire to have sex, and it felt actively unappealing to me because I had shut off my sexuality. Looking back, I saw it as a kind of service I had to perform, which was a recipe for an unsatisfying sex life. I was reading case studies about resentment building up in marriages over time, and I decided then that I needed to address this and be honest if I wanted mine to survive. So I started applying the principles I was learning in <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/learning/sex-with-emily-morse-masterclass-review">sex-therapy class</a> to my own life. <h2>We started by taking orgasms off the table </h2>We started by using a technique called "<a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/guides/health/sex-relationships/sensate-focus">sensate focus</a>," which involves taking a break from your rigid <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sex-script-helps-couples-transform-sex-life-therapist-advice-2021-6">sex scripts</a> and taking orgasms off the table.For a month, we didn't really have sex but played with physical touch to find what felt good. We started with <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-discover-erotic-blueprint-transform-your-sex-life-2021-10">non-erotic touch</a>, such as cuddling, back-scratching, and scalp massage, and then progressed to erotic touch without penetration while undressed.Eventually, we moved toward penetration, but the idea was to slowly build up to more <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/when-you-dont-have-sex-what-happens-to-your-body-2020-6">sexual touching</a> without the pressure of what it "should" be like or the expectation of orgasm, which can heighten anxiety and take you out of the moment. We worked on it for a few minutes each day during that month, or longer if we had time, like on weekends.It was a beautiful reset for our marriage and helped me realize that arousal could feel good and that sex could actually be pleasurable for me. I think there's a certain amount of normal maturation that people have in their teenage years that I just didn't have. It’s a time when many people develop the skill of being sexual, and I needed to go back and do some remediation work on what arousal even feels like, how to cultivate it, and how to integrate it into my life.As I've learned more, our <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/men-more-likely-than-women-sex-lives-improved-during-pandemic-2021-3">sex life has gotten better</a> and better. We have a deep connection and yearning for each other, which feels out-of-this-world exciting and empowering. <h2>As our sex life got better, we had more conflict </h2>My marriage now feels like a fundamentally different marriage than the one I had 10 years ago, but it’s with the same person.At the start, we both wanted to do what would make the other person happy, keep conflict low, and not rock the boat. It was probably the lowest conflict our marriage ever had. But you can only hide what you really think about your marriage for so long before it starts to erupt. We were being inauthentic, and that showed up in our sex life. As we worked on becoming more intimate and open with each other, conflict also became more frequent. I think this was because we weren’t hiding from ourselves anymore. We had more trust in what the relationship could handle, which often brings more honesty about how you feel about other things.But I see that as a sign of confidence and maturity that has led to more space for us both to be ourselves. <h2>Sex education is very fear-based </h2>Many people don’t have an adequate understanding of their sexuality because <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sex-education-therapist-explain-what-show-gets-right-and-wrong-2021-9">sex education</a> can be very fear-based. There’s this tension between <a target="_blank" href="https://www.businessinsider.com/sex-ed-things-wrong-2018-9">abstinence-only education</a> and focusing on STDs and pregnancy.We’re not taught about sexuality as the vehicle it can be for self-love, self-compassion, patience, and honoring who we are.A lot of people think when they start having issues with sex that there's something wrong with them, but I encourage my clients to see it as a sign that they’re about to progress into a deeper capacity for sexual intimacy.Everybody's maturing over their entire lifespan, and our capacity for sexual intimacy and connection should grow as we develop. It’s healthy.

I loved my husband but hated sex. A technique I learned at marriage-counselor training changed everything.

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Braun once said <keyword id="13451069" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="interracial-marriage" source="Orion">interracial marriage</keyword> should be left to states before having to clarify his remarks.</li><li>Now, GOP senators are being asked about a bill that would codify both same-sex and interracial marriage.</li></ul>Republican Sen. <keyword id="13441392" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="mike-braun" source="Orion">Mike Braun</keyword> of Indiana says he's undecided on whether to vote for a bill that would codify both <keyword id="12182095" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="same-sex-marriage" source="Orion">same-sex marriage</keyword> and interracial marriage into law, though he says he'd vote for it if the bill was just about interracial marriage."If it were that alone, of course, I would vote to codify it," he told Insider at the Capitol on Wednesday. "When it comes to the bill itself, I'm going to wait and see what's all in it."Braun was among a variety of GOP senators that wouldn't say on Wednesday whether they'd support the <a href="https://judiciary.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=4992">Respect for Marriage Act</a>.While both interracial marriage and same-sex marriage have been the law of the land since the Supreme Court's 1973 Loving v. Virginia decision and the 2015 Obergefell v. Hodges decision, conservative Justice Clarence Thomas's <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/justice-thomas-said-the-court-should-reconsider-rulings-on-same-sex-marriage-2022-6">concurring opinion</a> in the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-abortion-decision-final-ruling-scotus-roe-v-wade-2022-6">decision revoking the right to an abortion</a> has raised concerns that other rights are at risk.Braun indicated that voting to codify interracial marriage was an easy decision because "that's settled," while he would need to think more about whether the same principle applies to same-sex marriage."I'm going to look and see what Hoosiers are interested in my doing," he said. "And I'm going to look at the text itself." "We'll find out," he added. "We're gonna have a vote, it sounds like."Braun's statement in support of codifying interracial marriage comes after Braun made comments to reporters in Indiana that <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/republican-senator-mike-braun-questions-whether-the-supreme-court-should-have-legalized-interracial-marriage-2022-3">suggested he didn't support the Supreme Court's 1973 decision in Loving v. Virginia</a>, which overturned remaining state bans on interracial marriage. He later <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-braun-didnt-pay-attention-interracial-marriage-transgender-sports-abortion-2022-3">told Insider that he had misunderstood the question</a>, and he said on Wednesday that his comments had been "misconstrued."Republican senators are now grappling with how to vote on an issue that the Supreme Court decided 7 years ago, with many telling reporters on Wednesday that they were not sure how they would vote.After the <a href="https://www.insider.com/47-republicans-vote-in-favor-bill-protecting-same-sex-marriage-2022-7">bill passed the House</a> with 47 GOP yes votes on Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the Senate floor on Wednesday that he wants to "bring this bill to the floor" but is still "working to get the necessary Senate Republican support to ensure it would pass."Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Rob Portman of Ohio are co-sponsoring the bill, while Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina <a href="https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1549757192504492032">told CNN's Manu Raju</a> that "probably will" vote for it.Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska also told Insider that while she's still reviewing the bill, she supports marriage equality.In total, that would mean 4 Republican votes in favor of the bill, with 6 more needed to break a filibuster, alongside the 50 Democrats who are all publicly in support of the legislation.While some Republican senators — <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/marco-rubio-florida-same-sex-marriage-gas-prices-gay-people-2022-7">such as Marco Rubio of Florida</a> — said they would not support the legislation, others were noncommittal. "I'd have to look at the legislation," Republican Sen. Richard Burr of North Carolina told Insider. "Is that too much to ask?"Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah wouldn't say which way he'd vote on the bill, calling it "unnecessary" while <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/romney-on-clarence-thomas-hes-opened-a-lot-of-doors-that-no-other-justices-walk-through-2022-7">brushing off the significance of Thomas's ruling</a>. Republican Sen. Roy Blunt of Missouri was also noncommital on the legislation, but said he was supportive of <keyword id="12396054" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="gay-marriage" source="Orion">gay marriage</keyword>.And Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa, a member of GOP leadership, <a href="https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1549789471750733824?s=20&amp;t=_bpzn50eD2qWUIaJ90g9vg">told reporters</a> that she would keep "an open mind" about the bill. "I have a good number of very close friends that are same-sex married," she said.

GOP Sen. Mike Braun says he would vote to codify 'settled' interracial marriage but wants to 'wait and see' what his constituents think about same-sex unions

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Transportation Secretary <keyword id="12026650" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="pete-buttigieg" source="Orion">Pete Buttigieg</keyword> told GOP senators to "vote yes" on a bill to codify <keyword id="12182095" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="same-sex-marriage" source="Orion">same-sex marriage</keyword> and "move on."</li><li>The <keyword id="14511085" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="respect-for-marriage-act" source="Orion">Respect for Marriage Act</keyword> <a href="https://www.insider.com/47-republicans-vote-in-favor-bill-protecting-same-sex-marriage-2022-7">passed the House</a> with bipartisan support last week and now waits in the Senate.</li></ul>Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told Senate Republicans to "vote yes and move on" from on the House-backed legislation to codify <keyword id="12396054" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="gay-marriage" source="Orion">gay marriage</keyword> protections. Buttigieg, the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-biden-transportation/pete-buttigieg-becomes-first-openly-gay-cabinet-secretary-confirmed-by-u-s-senate-idUSKBN2A22IQ">first openly gay cabinet secretary</a>, made the comments during an interview with <a href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2022/07/24/pete-buttigieg-sam-sex-marriage-bill-republican-senators-rubio-reaction-sot-sotu-vpx.cnn">CNN's Jake Tapper</a> on Sunday ahead of the Senate's anticipated vote on the Respect for Marriage Act. The bill to codify same-sex marriage into law <a href="https://www.insider.com/47-republicans-vote-in-favor-bill-protecting-same-sex-marriage-2022-7">passed the House</a> with bipartisan support last week. But some House Republicans voted against the measure. "This is really, really important to a lot of people. It's certainly important to me," said Buttigieg, who <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/pete-buttigieg-chasten-august-penelope-rose-2021-9">has two children</a> with his husband, Chasten. "Our marriage deserves to be treated equally, and I don't know why this would be hard for a senator or a congressman." Tapper asked Buttigieg what he has to say to Republicans like Sen. <keyword id="12217307" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="marco-rubio" source="Orion">Marco Rubio</keyword>, who told a CNN reporter that the vote was a <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/marco-rubio-called-same-sex-marriage-vote-stupid-baldwin-report-2022-7">"stupid waste of time."</a> Rubio also <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/marco-rubio-florida-same-sex-marriage-gas-prices-gay-people-2022-7">told Insider's Bryan Metzger</a> that the bill is a "waste of our time on a non-issue," saying the decision should be made at a state level. "If he's got time to fight against Disney, I don't know why he wouldn't have time to help safeguard marriages like mine," Buttigieg said.Thus far, at least five GOP senators have said they would vote to pass the bill, according to <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2022/07/23/these-are-the-republican-senators-who-will-vote-to-codify-gay-marriage-as-a-right/?sh=673b4513e7aa">Forbes</a>. "If they don't want to spend a lot of time on this, they can vote yes and move on, and that would be really reassuring for a lot of families around America, including mine," Buttigieg said. He later added that he doesn't "understand" why House Republicans voted against the measure. In the 267-157 vote last week, <a href="https://twitter.com/metzgov/status/1549536182815625223?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1549539035261140996%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es2_&amp;ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.insider.com%2F47-republicans-vote-in-favor-bill-protecting-same-sex-marriage-2022-7">47 House Republicans</a> voted in favor. "I don't understand, because such a majority of House Republicans voted no on our marriage as recently as Tuesday, hours after I was in a room with a lot of them talking about transportation policy, having what I thought were perfectly normal conversations with many of them on that subject," Buttigieg said, "only for them to go around the corner and say that my marriage doesn't deserve to continue."

Buttigieg says he doesn't get why some House Republicans voted against gay marriage bill and tells Senate to 'vote yes and move on'

<ul class="summary-list"><li>GOP Sen. <keyword id="12217307" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="marco-rubio" source="Orion">Marco Rubio</keyword> told Insider he wouldn't vote for a bill to codify <keyword id="12182095" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="same-sex-marriage" source="Orion">same-sex marriage</keyword> into law.</li><li>"I know plenty of gay people in Florida that are pissed off about gas prices," he quipped.</li></ul>Republican Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida told Insider on Wednesday that he would not vote to codify same-sex marriage at the federal level, calling it a "non-issue.""I don't know why we're doing that bill, there's no threat to its status in America," he told Punchbowl <keyword id="11893589" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="news" source="Orion">News</keyword> reporter Christian Hall when asked about the <a href="https://www.insider.com/house-will-vote-on-marriage-equality-protection-after-clarence-thomas-opinion-2022-7">Respect for Marriage Act</a>. "But I know plenty of gay people in Florida that are pissed off about gas prices."The bipartisan bill, which <a href="https://www.insider.com/47-republicans-vote-in-favor-bill-protecting-same-sex-marriage-2022-7">passed the House on Tuesday with 47 Republicans joining every Democrat in favor</a>, would write protections for both same-sex and <keyword id="13451069" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="interracial-marriage" source="Orion">interracial marriage</keyword> into law.Six Republicans from Florida voted for the bill, including Reps. Kat Cammack, Mario Diaz-Balart, Carlos Gimenez, Brian Mast, Maria Elvira Salazar, and Mike Waltz.Asked whether he supported same-sex marriage generally, Rubio punted again."States decide marriage laws, they always have," he said. "It's why you can get married in Las Vegas by an Elvis impersonator in two hours."Insider then asked Rubio why he wouldn't say clearly which way he'd vote."I'm not voting for that bill, what do you mean I won't say how I'll vote?" he said, calling the bill a "waste of our time on a non-issue."Rubio is up for re-election this year and is expected to face Democrat Val Demings in the state's US Senate race.Asked for clarification on Rubio's comments, his communications director Dan Holler pointed out that the Florida Republican has been consistent in his position on the issue."I don't think the current Constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate marriage," Rubio <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-december-13-2015-n479241">said on "Meet The Press" in December 2015</a>. "That belongs at the state and local level."The push to codify same-sex marriage into federal law comes after the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-abortion-decision-final-ruling-scotus-roe-v-wade-2022-6">Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade last month</a>, revoking the right to an abortion at the federal law.Conservative Justice Clarence Thomas <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/justice-thomas-said-the-court-should-reconsider-rulings-on-same-sex-marriage-2022-6">wrote in his concurring opinion</a> that the court "should reconsider all of this Court's substantive due process precedents, including Griswold, Lawrence, and Obergefell" — referring to three landmark decisions regarding the right to access contraception, anti-sodomy laws, and same-sex marriage.

GOP Sen. Marco Rubio says he wouldn't vote to codify same-sex marriage into law but knows 'plenty of gay people in Florida that are pissed off about gas prices'

You Searched For "Same sex marriages" and got 11 results

Inclusivity pays off: Countries with same-sex marriage retain skilled professionals more effectively, per study

Kunal Kambli

GOP support for same-sex marriage keeps dropping

Bryan Metzger

Same sex marriages are still not legal – A look at the financial rights of LGBTQ couples

Anagh Pal

For Gen Zers tired of dating, applications for lavender marriages are open

Lindsay Dodgson

A GOP House candidate opposed IVF coverage for same-sex couples, once saying it would create a 'false sense of equality'

Bryan Metzger

Mike Johnson backed Clarence Thomas' suggestion that the Supreme Court 'reconsider' its rulings on contraception and same-sex marriage

Sonam Sheth

I loved my husband but hated sex. A technique I learned at marriage-counselor training changed everything.

Kim Schewitz

GOP Sen. Mike Braun says he would vote to codify 'settled' interracial marriage but wants to 'wait and see' what his constituents think about same-sex unions

Bryan Metzger

Buttigieg says he doesn't get why some House Republicans voted against gay marriage bill and tells Senate to 'vote yes and move on'

Katie Balevic

GOP Sen. Marco Rubio says he wouldn't vote to codify same-sex marriage into law but knows 'plenty of gay people in Florida that are pissed off about gas prices'

Bryan Metzger

The professors filmed themselves having sex with porn stars. Their university was not pleased.

Hallie Lieberman

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides