|
|
| Post Number: 1
|
alcitizens 
Albert Lea
Group: Members
Posts: 3664
Joined: Jul. 2009
|
 |
Posted on: Aug. 05 2010,6:08 am |
|
   |
The legality of same-sex marriage has come under scrutiny. It is good to examine seemingly new philosophies and perspectives; how else can we determine the rightness of something? But what hasn’t been considered is the legality of denying same-sex marriage.
Article Four of the Federal Constitution 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.
Clause 1: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States."
In other words, no State has the right to ignore civil agreements reached in other States. So if a same-sex couple in Massachusetts gets married after 2004-May 16th, no State has the right to ignore that marriage. In fact, all States are required to recognize that marriage, because it is a Civil matter. What this essentially means is that State Defense of Marriage Acts (DOMAs) are unconstitutional, plain and simple.
What about the Federal DOMA? Sorry, that, too, will be struck down soon, as it also is unconstitutional by virtue of the Tenth Amendment, which states:
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people."
Because the Constitution does not explicitly give the Federal Government jurisdiction over marriage, the right to regulate marriage is, by default, given solely to the States to decide. Therefore, Congress had neither right nor power to pass DOMA in the first place.
The solution, some may argue, is to amend the Federal Constitution, which is what George W. Bush endorses. There is one problem with that: Article Six reads:
"This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
Boiled down, this means that the Constitution is barred from contradicting itself. Thus, a Federal Marriage Amendment that would deprive a singled-out populace of any rights runs in clear contradiction to Article Four and Amendment Nine of the Constitution. Amendment Nine states:
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."
The Constitution says in Amendment Fourteen:
"Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. 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."
What this basically means is that the States do not have a right to pick and choose the people to whom it will grant rights and privileges. If one group of people is allowed to marry, all groups are allowed to marry. If same-sex couples are barred from marriage, it is an abridgement of the privileges they are entitled to as citizens of the United States; it would be a deprivation of liberty and prosperity, and would strip same-sex couples of equal protection of the laws. Plainly, it is discriminatory, and the Fourteenth Article clearly states that selective granting of privileges is not allowed in the United States.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/dixon_02.htm
|
 |
|
|
| Post Number: 2
|
Santorini
Group: Members
Posts: 2015
Joined: Nov. 2007
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 05 2010,9:02 am |
|
 |
Exactly 
What the constitutional articles are for is to protect the citizens.
To protect the human being, the male, the female, no matter if they are black, white, green, purple, red, doesn't matter.
Most would be in agreement with that.
The protection of American Citizen's and their rights under the constitution as American Citizen's and most opposed to gay marriage would agree.
Most opposed to gay marrage to not discriminate against the human being, the person...it's the behavior 
--------------
"Things turn out best for those who make the best
of the way things turned out." Jack Buck
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 3
|
gijoeman
H-E-Double Hockey Sticks
Group: Members
Posts: 694
Joined: Apr. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 05 2010,9:33 am |
|
|
No, it's a human right.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 4
|
|
|
| Post Number: 5
|
|
|
| Post Number: 6
|
gijoeman
H-E-Double Hockey Sticks
Group: Members
Posts: 694
Joined: Apr. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 05 2010,5:02 pm |
|
|
Thank you, welcome to true faith my friend...
Attached Image
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 7
|
|
|
| Post Number: 8
|
Two Bears
Group: Members
Posts: 527
Joined: May 2005
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 06 2010,2:20 am |
|
|
(Botto 82 @ Aug. 05 2010,10:48 am)
QUOTE
(Santorini @ Aug. 05 2010,9:02 am)
QUOTE Most opposed to gay marrage to not discriminate against the human being, the person...it's the behavior Why?
Because it's ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE.
--------------
VOTE - ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE
HAVING A LIBERAL ALONG IS LIKE LOSING TWO GOOD MEN
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 9
|
gijoeman
H-E-Double Hockey Sticks
Group: Members
Posts: 694
Joined: Apr. 2010
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 06 2010,9:32 am |
|
|
So you're going to punish today's people for some bible snake story that was obviously fiction written by men before they new what an atom or germ was?
Ya, yer a regular Einstein.
|
|
|
|
| Post Number: 10
|
Two Bears
Group: Members
Posts: 527
Joined: May 2005
|
|
Posted on: Aug. 06 2010,11:25 am |
|
|
Were you discharged because of the don't ask don't tell policy?
Hey if it is so moral to be a homo why do you hide in the closet? Because you know it's wrong.
--------------
VOTE - ADAM AND EVE NOT ADAM AND STEVE
HAVING A LIBERAL ALONG IS LIKE LOSING TWO GOOD MEN
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
