View Single Post
  #19  
Old 11-06-2008, 01:22 PM
strandinthewind's Avatar
strandinthewind strandinthewind is offline
Addicted Ledgie
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New York City
Posts: 25,791
Default

Here is a post I made in the "election results" thread. It is relevant here.

This is why Obama was such an important win. What will now happen is same sex couples who marry in a state that allows it will try and make non allowing states recognize their marriages.

Article IV, Sec. 1 of the U.S. Const. states:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

What this means is twofold:

1. Each state must recognize a marriage performed in another state as is what happens now in hetero marriage. The plain language of the Constitution must override the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), 28 U.S.C. § 1738C, which states:

1. No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) need treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.

2. The Federal Government may not treat same-sex relationships as marriages for any purpose, even if concluded or recognized by one of the states.

DOMA will be found Unconstitutional and overturned.

2. If a state that disallows a same sex marriage but allows a hetero marriage without providing a legitimate and, perhaps, compelling reason essentially with, perhaps, no less restrictive alternative (See Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003)) - the state disallowing the marriage will likely be seen as violating Article XIV, Sec. 1 (the so called "equal protection clause" ) - which states in relevant part that:

. . . No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
____________________________________

Once The Supreme Court makes these findings, the R's most def. will then push to amend the U.S. Const. to make marriage solely between a man and a woman. Within that lang. will also be the prohibition of civil unions, which really have nothing to do with marriage.

I'd love to get Heather's (Mad4stevie) opinion on this rather fascinating Constitutional argument and the effect of the Obama justices on it.

In the end, I just cannot see why it is so important to deny same sex couples the same benefits accorded automatically by law to hetero couples. But, the majority of Christians in this country cannot let others choose their own paths. They want to impose their widely different versions Christian principles on the masses no matter the Const. prohibition against doing so.
__________________
Photobucket

save the cheerleader - save the world
Reply With Quote