Yesterday, Maine voted down gay marriage. This is a sickening blow to LGBT supporters everywhere, especially after the fall of California just last year.
I understand that it isn't the federal government's place to pass legislation for the legalization of gay marriage, the same way as it isn't their place to legalize marijuana. I get that. States rights are very important, and I am in full support of less national government. But let's think about this for a second.
Interracial marriage wasn't deemed legal until 1967, but previous to the Supreme Court case that made it law, states like Washington, New Mexico, and Maine passed it within their states. In fact, only 16 states hadn't passed it before Loving v Virginia made it national law.
Upon the court's decision, they stated this. "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. The Fourteenth Amendment requires that the freedom of choice to marry not be restricted by invidious racial discrimination. Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State."
What I don't understand is why this same argument doesn't apply to same-sex couples. Just because they don't have a specific amendment in the Constitution allowing them to vote doesn't mean that they shouldn't have the same rights to marry.
Currently, gay marriage is legal in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, and New Hampshire. Five states. We have a while to go before getting to the point of where interracial marriage was when it was made law.
But what I want to know is why no same-sex couple has brought their case to the Supreme court. They'd have the ability, especially if they were married legally in Connecticut and then moved to Nevada, hoping to get the same legal recognition. Obviously, they wouldn't, but this violates the constitution. Specifically, it violates Article IV, Section 1 of the Constitution: Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State.
Judicial proceedings? According to Legal-Dictionary.com, judicial proceedings are "any action by a judge". From the same website, a marriage license is "a legal document giving official permission to be married". Therefore, any state not recognizing two legally married persons from another state as married is unconstitutional, and therefore illegal.
My government teacher told me something about "definitions" when I asked him about this, but that doesn't change the fact that it is in the Constitution.
There is no reason anyone should be against the legality of gay marriage. Sure, morally some people may have a problem with it, but since the law deals with justice and not morality, keep your morals to yourself and let the rest of us live according to our personal beliefs.
Related Links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/30/us/30maine.html
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2009/11/06/Gay-marriage-opponents-wont-give-up/UPI-22651257519042/
No comments:
Post a Comment