In this web site, "SSM" is an acronym that refers to same-sex marriage.
FutureTimeline.net predicted that same-sex marriage will be available across all 50 states in 2024.
Future Timeline is a fascinating web site by author Will Fox. He attempts to predict medical, social, computer, environmental, transportation, and other changes, achievements, and developments during the rest of the 21st century! He predicted that:
In 2014, Mississippi would be the last state to legalize SSM, making same-sex marriage "... legal in every US state." 1 .
Fox apparently assumed that the practice of state-by-state SSM battles in legislatures, courts and/or citizen initiatives would continue until 2024.
Predictions by this web site -- www.religioustolerance.org:
In 2013-JUL, when this essay was first placed online, the webmaster of the ReligiousTolerance.org web site predicted that universal access to marriage by same-sex couples would happen much earlier -- say about 2019. By that time, I predicted:
Most of the states in the Northeast, West, and many states in the Midwest would have already legalized SSM.
Only about a dozen states -- mainly in the deep South -- would still ban SSMs, mostly by amendments to their constitutions.
One or more lawsuits launched in one of the states where SSM was still forbidden would be accepted by the U.S. Supreme Court. The court will would issue a ruling similar to the one that it issued during 1967 in Loving v. Virginia . Their decision in Loving legalized interracial marriages across the entire country. This declared unconstitutional the remaining laws banning interracial marriage in 16 contiguous states contained within the triangle from Virginia, to Texas to Florida.
At the present time, one and a half years later in very early 2015, the process of legalizing same-sex marriage had been accelerated beyond almost everyone's expectations. Marriage equality had been attained throughout 36 states, and the District of Columbia, and in some sections of Missouri. Bans on SSM only survived in 13 states. This was a half decade before our previous estimate. In addition, cases from five states have been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. On 2015-JAN-09, the nine justices of the high court meet to decide whether to accept one or more of these cases. This could start the process in which the court legalizes same-sex marriage across the entire country in 2015-JUN.
2013-JUN: New York Times article predicts a gradual increase in the number of states with marriage equality leading to a major decision by the U.S. Supreme Court:
A culture altering decision on 2013-JUN-26 by the U.S. Supreme Court in Windsor v. United States declared a major part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act to be unconstitutional,
Shortly afterwards, Erik Eckholm, writing in the Politics section of the New York Times2 described activities at the time by pro and anti SSM groups:
Pro-SSM groups: Their main effort is to continue the state-by-state battles in state Legislatures to legalize SSM. They are expecting victory in the Legislatures of Illinois and perhaps New Jersey and Hawaii by early 2014. In the 2014-NOV elections, they hoped that state constitutional amendments banning SSM might be repealed in Ohio and Oregon, eventually leading to marriage equality in those states. Also the ambiguous status in New Mexico towards SSM might be resolved in the courts. They expect that if national public support for SSM continues to increase, and if a sufficient number of states attain marriage equality, then the U.S. Supreme Court will eventually make SSM a civil right for all same-sex couples across the country, as it did in 1967 in the case Loving v. Virginia for interracial couples.
Evan Wolfson, the founder of Freedom to Marry, who said:
"Building a critical mass of states and a critical mass of public support â€" thatâ€™s how social movements succeed. Weâ€™ll pursue this strategy until we finish the job. ... I think it will be a matter of years, not decades."
Fred Sainz, a vice president of the Human Rights Campaign said that the 2013-JUN-26 rulings by the U.S. Supreme Court will shine a light on the:
"two Americas: one in which legally married gay couples live and the other in which unmarried gay families live."
Among the latter group, basic protections and benefits for same-sex couples and their children do not exist.
Webmaster's comment: They do seem to have history on their side. Without exception, past civil rights conflicts that ended slavery, allowed deaf couples to marry, allowed women to vote, gave women equal employment opportunities, allowed interracial couples to marry, started the process of ending racial segregation, decriminalized same-gender sexual behavior, etc. have all eventually been at least partly resolved in favor of increased civil rights for women and minorities.
Anti-SSM groups: They note that their major recent defeats between 2012-NOV and 2013-MAY in Delaware, Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, Rhode Island and Washington State were largely caused by the massive funding spent by pro-SSM groups. Frank Schubert, vice president of the National Organization for Marriage suggests that:
"These court decisions could be a real boon to our fund-raising. People tend to react when the wolf is at the door."
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, which has been designated by the Southern Poverty Law Center as an anti-gay hate group, 3said:
"The lines are being drawn between states that stand with natural, traditional marriage and states that redefined it." 8
Webmaster's comment: Anti-SSM groups believe that many Americans will become opposed to SSM when they learn that children in some states are being taught that same-sex couples can now marry, or when they learn that Christian owners of businesses occasionally run afoul of state human rights legislation. These state laws often prohibit businesses from discriminating against customers on the basis of the latter's skin color, race, gender, religion, nationality, sexual orientation etc. Some wedding cake bakers, wedding photographers, wedding organizers, wedding gown outlets, renters of wedding venues, etc. who are in business to serve the general public have refused to provide their goods and services to same-sex couples who are planning to marry. Anti-SSM groups are spreading information about such occurrences and classifying prosecution of suppliers of wedding goods and services as violations of religious freedom and liberty.
However, "religious freedom" is rapidly changing its meaning to mean the religious freedom of believers to oppress. denigrate, discriminate against minorities -- often the LGBT community. Very few commentators have noticed that such discrimination is a direct violation of one of Jesus' commands: the Golden Rule -- often expressed as: "One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself." 5