In Obergefell et al. v. Hodges, Director, Ohio Department of Health, et al (Obergefell), 2015, the US Supreme Court supposedly legalized same-sex marriage across America, thus, resting the “right to marry” advocacy in America post-United States v. Windsor. The Court premised its decision inter alia, on the quest for expansive protection of the rights to marriage and equality under the Fourteenth Amendment to the US Constitution. Nonetheless, Obergefell still generates mixed pro-love discussion in legal, academic, sematic, socio-cultural, religious, and political circles inside and outside America. This paper distinguishes “civil union” from “marriage” and argues that logically, socio-religiously, scientifically, grammatically or otherwise, “same-sex marriage” is a mere jargon because marriage is naturally and practically impossible between persons of the same biological sex. The paper concludes that Obergefell is a judicial endorsement of an impossibility, and a somersault of human dignity. It may seem afro-centric, but it certainly furthers scholarship on marriage and “the other side” of Obergefell.