A California lawmaker has set her sights on traditional marriage — or at least the terminology that has historically been associated with it.
Democratic Rep. Julia Brownley of California introduced the “Amend the Code for Marriage Equality Act” on Friday and it specifically targets two words that have long been associated with the state of matrimony.
Brownley’s 57-page act seeks to “strike gendered terms like ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ from federal laws and replace them with the term ‘spouse.’”
The California congresswoman claimed the legislation was a direct response to what she called the Supreme Court and states “rolling back the rights of the LGBTQ community.”
“Although the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples have the right to marry, there are many instances where the U.S. Code does not respect that constitutional right,” Brownley said in a news release.
She added: “Now more than ever, with an extreme Supreme Court and state legislatures rolling back the rights of the LGBTQ community, it is imperative that Congress showcases its commitment to supporting equality.
“This common-sense bill will ensure that our federal code reflects the equality of all marriages by recognizing and acting upon the notion that the words in our laws have meaning and our values as a country are reflected in our laws.”
The bill itself lays out each instance where “wife” or “husband” should be replaced with “spouse” in federal law — and replacing the term “husband and wife” with “married couple.”
Those instances range from legislation involving military disability to a deed conveyance by the secretary of agriculture in 1955, to the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949.
Should the terms “husband” and “wife” be abolished in federal law?
Yes: 0% (0 Votes)
No: 100% (5 Votes)
The move from Brownley targeting “gendered” language largely follows the footsteps of her fellow Democrats.
Especially in recent years, Democrats have focused on targeting many of these “gendered” terms under the guise of LGBT equality.
Perhaps most infamously, the Biden administration drew all manner of condemnation after it seemingly erased the term “mother” in its 2022 fiscal budget report with “birthing person.”
“I was a little taken aback when I just read it and saw it, that the term mother was gone in spots and it was replaced with ‘birthing people,’” Sen. James Lankford told Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra at a 2021 Senate hearing. “And I didn’t know if this a direction that you were going, if there were shifts, if there are regulatory changes that are happening related to that or what the purpose of that [name change] is.”
Another ignominious moment came when details began to leak about the Democrat’s highly-publicized $3.5 trillion spending bill from 2021.
In it, Democrats again sought to replace “gendered” language, replacing the term “pregnant woman” with “pregnant, lactating, and postpartum individuals.”
There are numerous other examples, and it’s clear that Democrats are latching onto “gendered” language as a hot-button issue — at least within their own party.
The issue itself has largely transcended politics, however, as the cultural zeitgeist has latched onto LGBT issues — with the Bud Light debacle involving transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney as perhaps the most prominent recent example of just what a lightning rod it is.
