One of the counter-arguments I've heard most from anti-marriage equality folks is that there is no right to gay marriage in the Constitution. They say this rather triumphantly, which is rather odd. I mean, it's kind of plain to me as a case of equal treatment under the law. Straight couples get scads of legal rights, benefits and responsibilities by getting married, and gay couples didn't. That's pretty simple.
But if that doesn't convince you, this clip is extremely instructive, and not just a little entertaining. This guy knows his stuff, speaks clearly and concisely, and would be very, very difficult to argue with.
First, congratulations on your win.,
ReplyDeleteThis is where I disagree with you: Equal treatment is your argument but it is the States that have determined what rights gays have or not have.
It is not a federal issue and the Supremes' had no right to tell the states how they can determine what is marriage and what is not.
There is nothing in the constitution that says you have the right to marry. It should be determined by each state and their standards.
Just like the death penalty- each state is different and they have the right to determine if a thug should get the death penalty or not. The courts allow for different punishments between the states.
Each state has their own views on how they want to rule and what may be what the people want in Ohio may be different than in Idaho or in New York or in Texas.
And I think bad things will come from this ruling, in different areas of the law and you may not like the results of what may happen.
But enjoy your win and congratulations and I really do mean that.
Thanks for the congratulations. But it IS a federal issue given that the populace moves between states. I moved from Nevada (where we'd recently been recognized as a legal marriage) to Ohio (where we weren't). This presented complications with both our home purchase and with the registration of our cars and other issues with The Other Half still commuting away so often. People don't stay put in one state, and sometimes (like me) are dealing with each spouse sometimes in a different state. We were living in a situation where he was married and I wasn't! It made no kind of legal sense.
ReplyDeleteThe military was demanding a solution, because they have to treat the enlisted the same everywhere, and some states didn't recognize the marriages. It was untenable, and ran contrary to the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution in addition to the 14th amendment.
Ohio in particular had a nasty anti-gay constitutional amendment that didn't just outlaw same-sex marriage, it prevented anything legally approximating marriage. I'm glad it's gone, and the only "bad things" I think are on the horizon are the flood of "religious exemption" attempts that are sure to come down the pike.
Thanks again for the congratulations.
Before this, every time your hubby flew, your divorce record must've looked like a conservative politician's. Married, not-married, married, not-married but recognized, married, not married... ... .. . . . . . . .
DeleteJamie, this is where I disagree with you:
ReplyDeleteThere are different standards between states in just about everything.
My beat up old car, when we moved from Wisconsin to Vegas had to undergo changes because of the different regulations between states, especially the smog checks.
Teachers just cannot move from 1 state to another without taking additional classes or you may not even be able to teach from 1 state to another due to different standards.
How about trying to by insurance across state lines- cannot be done.
Truck drivers/companies have different standards between states: Cali is very tough on trucks vs states like Mississippi.
There are some food products you can buy in some states but are prohibited at others, like unpasteurized milk.
Voting: voter ID vs non-voter ID and you cannot vote in different states.
The list can go on and on doing business and living between states.
So, that is my objection to the Supreme's ruling.
Marriage has traditionally been honored from one state to another regardless of specific differences in law. One state may have no 1st-cousins marrying, but they honor one from another state.
ReplyDeleteAnother problem is that none of these states were able to put forward a legally sound state's interest for barring same-sex marriage in their state. All of their arguments were shot down.
ReplyDelete