 |
 |
Saturday, November 06, 2004 - 05:52 PM
Same Sex Marriage: A question of integrity, of bigotry
Judges attempts to overthrow law is out-of-bounds
By Christopher Blanton
Over the past year and a half, the topic of the homosexual marriage and whether or not such a marriage should be legal under the United States code of law has become larger and sprouted new angles.
“What do I care if two loving individuals want to spend the rest of their lives together?” is one thought I have. However, intrusion on the institution of marriage that has possessed a palpable place throughout history makes one question the significance of what is happening.
There are already laws in the United States Code that clearly define marriage as being between one man and one woman. It is part of the Defense of Marriage Act that was passed by the Congress and signed into law by President Bill Clinton.
When federal judges begin to ignore laws that are codified, it threatens the integrity of our entire way of governing, throwing it out the window as if it is worthless. Judges jobs are to interpret and enforce the laws.
If Judges want to try and change a law, fine, that is democracy in action, and there is a time and a place for that. But their job is not to re-write laws from the bench. They can claim a law to be unconstitutional, but they can’t just start marrying people, and neither can rogue mayors from San Francisco, or small towns in New York. They also have to abide by the laws that our trusted representatives have decided it is in our best interest to live by.
Further, if we allow same sex marriage, there are going to be all types of people and "freaks", sorry to be so blunt but I have no other way to describe it, coming out of the woodwork to claim they should be able to marry. Polygamy comes immediately back into play and in this context, a viable looming question.
Right now, Ohio is voting on whether or not to add a gay marriage ban to the Constitution of Ohio. I am not so much interested in Ohio’s ban, but the subject of states rights regarding this issue.
I am all for states rights and reducing the size and influence of the federal government; however, this is an issue that is best left up to the federal government to decide, so it trumps all. We have already seen lawsuits presented where a couple married in one state wants other states to acknowledge this union.
Leaving it to states creates a huge mess in our legal system, and more bureaucratic nonsense. Since this is such a looming issue in the past few years all over the country, it would make sense to place this issue on the ballot in a national election and have the people decide if they feel a ban on gay marriage is necessary or not.
While I realize that this is not how our system of governance is established, it seems like a fair solution to such a controversial problem. This way the people of America can set the precedent.
I believe everyone has a right to be happy and am all for individuals living as they wish, but I am not content sitting by and allowing judges to legislate from the bench. That is a precedent that must be addressed and terminated.
Sanctity of marriage contesters: throw your efforts into Vegas
By Michael Meldon Jr.
If conservatives have their way, we will take a huge step backward with an Amendment that makes same-sex marriages illegal. This push could also nullify any same-sex partnership laws in individual states and localities. With such an amendment, civil rights protections based on marital status could be abolished also. This country has come too far with personal liberties and civil rights to revert to legalized discrimination in our Constitution.
It was over 35 years ago that the U.S. overturned a law that prohibited people of different races from getting married. We did not see opposition to this Amendment, because the Constitution has always been used to protect personal freedoms, not restrict them. The law did much to bring races together and create a more open and diverse society, rather than drive a wedge through society like the gay marriage ban would do.
If conservative groups were seriously trying to protect the sanctity of marriage, they would go after drive-up wedding chapels in Las Vegas where drunk 22 year-olds get married on a dare, or prosecute people like Jennifer Lopez that think marriage comes before getting to know the person.
Currently, same-sex couples face numerous legal problems including hospital visiting privileges, beneficiary contracts, and group health insurance. If all men are created equal, why should such rights and privileges be reserved for only the straight and narrow? Two people, who are committed to each other, regardless of sexual orientation, should have the legal right to be recognized as such and receive the benefits of that union as written in law. Anything less is discrimination.
This issue is not about marriage, it is about bigotry. These conservative groups abhor every aspect of the homosexual way of life. They do not want this “backward” and “wrong” lifestyle to be accepted by society. They see the marriage issue as the last wall they have standing in defense of the rising gay tide that will flood society, and they want to stop it with their strongest tool—the United States Constitution.
In order to protect the sanctity of our Constitution, we must not allow our most important document and legal authority to be used to discriminate. This would move our country in the wrong direction and go against individual freedoms and liberties at a fundamental level.
If we succeed, embracing the commitment of two same-sex individuals could help move our society forward by accepting diversity and difference. Hopefully, 35 years from now, this dilemma will be long forgotten and gay rights will be a moot point. Equal rights might not only be the norm—it will be the bare minimum.
Links
· CNN.com – “McCain: Same-Sex Marriage Ban Is Un-Republican”
· Nogaymarriage.com – “Million for Marriage”
· The BostonPhoenix.com “The Biblical Sense”
· Defense of Marriage Act
· DefendMarriage.net
· CampusProgram.com -- Marriage/ Types of Marriage
· PAFTMC.org – “Evolution of Institution of Marriage”
Contact Information
· christopherb@queencityforum.com
· michaelmjr@queencityforum.com
|
|
| |
|
|
