Gay Couples:Marriage Not a Right

[AJT]

To: [email protected] http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVGreenMarriage90712.html
>
> How do we know that? States can deny marriage licenses for various reasons,
such as hereditary diseases.If marriage were a right, no license or state
approval would be necessary, just as no state approval is necessary to vote or
get a job or have children or buy an automobile.

Some possible reasons for denial:

http://www.obermayerfamilymatters.com/2014/02/a-license-to-wed-can-you-be-denied
-a-marriage-license/

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

To: [email protected] http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVGreenMarriage90712.html
>
> How do we know that? States can deny marriage licenses for various reasons,
such as hereditary diseases.If marriage were a right, no license or state
approval would be necessary, just as no state approval is necessary to vote or
get a job or have children or buy an automobile.

Some possible reasons for denial:

http://www.obermayerfamilymatters.com/2014/02/a-license-to-wed-can-you-be-denied
-a-marriage-license/

As a fact of Constitutional law, marriage is a right.

Otherwise, citizens must first register before exercising their right to vote, and there are states and jurisdictions which require a license to purchase a firearm.

Consequently, your 'argument' fails, where although our rights are inalienable, they are not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions – and regulations – by government.

 

[DGS49]

The C Clayton Jones "Constitution," apparently says whatever you want it to say.

I believe this thread refers to the U.S. Constitution, so your comment is...stupid?...inapplicable?

 

[TheOldSchool]

Well we'll know in a week or two. I'm confident the SC will legalize it across the country.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

To: [email protected] http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVGreenMarriage90712.html
>
> How do we know that? States can deny marriage licenses for various reasons,
such as hereditary diseases.If marriage were a right, no license or state
approval would be necessary, just as no state approval is necessary to vote or
get a job or have children or buy an automobile.

Some possible reasons for denial:

http://www.obermayerfamilymatters.com/2014/02/a-license-to-wed-can-you-be-denied
-a-marriage-license/

Voting's a right, but we need a voter registration.

 

[AJT]

To: [email protected] http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVGreenMarriage90712.html
>
> How do we know that? States can deny marriage licenses for various reasons,
such as hereditary diseases.If marriage were a right, no license or state
approval would be necessary, just as no state approval is necessary to vote or
get a job or have children or buy an automobile.

Some possible reasons for denial:

http://www.obermayerfamilymatters.com/2014/02/a-license-to-wed-can-you-be-denied
-a-marriage-license/

As a fact of Constitutional law, marriage is a right.

Where in the Constitution does it say this????

Otherwise, citizens must first register before exercising their right to vote, and there are states and jurisdictions which require a license to purchase a firearm.

Registering to vote is automatic and does not require state approval.

 

[AJT]

Marriage is a constitutional right.

Rush is wrong, most of the time, on cultural and law.

That did not come from Rush. I sent him a copy of my argument.

 

[AJT]

To: [email protected] http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVGreenMarriage90712.html
>
> How do we know that? States can deny marriage licenses for various reasons,
such as hereditary diseases.If marriage were a right, no license or state
approval would be necessary, just as no state approval is necessary to vote or
get a job or have children or buy an automobile.

Some possible reasons for denial:

http://www.obermayerfamilymatters.com/2014/02/a-license-to-wed-can-you-be-denied
-a-marriage-license/

As a fact of Constitutional law, marriage is a right.

Otherwise, citizens must first register before exercising their right to vote, and there are states and jurisdictions which require a license to purchase a firearm.

Consequently, your 'argument' fails, where although our rights are inalienable, they are not absolute, and subject to reasonable restrictions – and regulations – by government.

 

[AJT]

Where does the Const say marriage is a right? It does not even mention marriage.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The C Clayton Jones "Constitution," apparently says whatever you want it to say.

I believe this thread refers to the U.S. Constitution, so your comment is...stupid?...inapplicable?

It is what the SCOTUS and Congress determine, not far right social con Christians.

 

[AJT]

Online
AJTRookie
Joined:
Apr 24, 2015
Messages:
14
Thanks Received:
1
Trophy Points:
1
Ratings:
+1

New
Where does the Const say marriage is a right? It does not even mention marriage.

 

[mdk]

Marriage is a right. There isn't any valid legal reason to deny gays access to marriage. Not one.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Marriage is a constitutional right.

Rush is wrong, most of the time, on cultural and law.

That did not come from Rush. I sent him a copy of my argument.

Then, Marriage is a constitutional right.

AJT is wrong on this issue.

Your argument is a fallacy of difference in kind not degree. You do not realize that a right (bear arms, religious belief, marriage) are is not a privilege, such as a driver's license.

 

[JakeStarkey]

]14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right ...


American Foundation for Equal Rights
Jul 19, 2012 - 14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right

It is well-established and crystal clear that the right to marry is a central aspect of the right to liberty, privacy, association, and identity.

Fourteen times since 1888, the United States Supreme Court has stated that marriage is a fundamental right of all individuals. In these cases, the Court has reaffirmed that “freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage” is “one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause,” “essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,” and “sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”

Here is a list of the fourteen cases, with links to the opinions and citations to the Court’s discussion of the right to marry.

1. Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 205, 211 (1888): Marriage is “the most important relation in life” and “the foundation of the family and society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.”
2. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923): The right “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” is a central part of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
3. Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942): Marriage “one of the basic civil rights of man,” “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.”
4. Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965): “We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights—older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.”
5. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967): “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”
6. Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 376, 383 (1971): “[M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society” and is “a fundamental human relationship.”
7. Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974): “This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
8. Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977) (plurality): “[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.”
9. Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977): “t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.”
   [*]Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978): “[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”
   [*]Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987): “[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment.”
   [*]Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992): “These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
   [*]M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116 (1996): “Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
   [*]Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 574 (2003): “[O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education. … Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.”
   

 

[mdk]

The link in the OP requires one to sign in. Can we a brief run down of what the link contains?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Where does the Const say marriage is a right? It does not even mention marriage.

The Constitution exists solely in the context of its case law; "but that's not in the Constitution" is a failed and ignorant "argument."

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

To: [email protected] http://www.nationalcenter.org/P21NVGreenMarriage90712.html
>
> How do we know that? States can deny marriage licenses for various reasons,
such as hereditary diseases.If marriage were a right, no license or state
approval would be necessary, just as no state approval is necessary to vote or
get a job or have children or buy an automobile.

Some possible reasons for denial:

http://www.obermayerfamilymatters.com/2014/02/a-license-to-wed-can-you-be-denied
-a-marriage-license/

How about to own or carry a gun? If I'm not mistaken, many of the same people who say that marriage is not a right will also say that having guns is a right. Why is that.?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

The C Clayton Jones "Constitution," apparently says whatever you want it to say.

I believe this thread refers to the U.S. Constitution, so your comment is...stupid?...inapplicable?

You do understand that "constitutional law" is more than the text of the document and the amendments? You do understand that there are more rights than those that are enumerated and that case law matters. right?

 

[Unkotare]

Marriage is a right....

Where is that written in the Constitution?

 

[mdk]

Marriage is a right....

Where is that written in the Constitution?

I didn't say it was written in the Constitution. The courts have ruled time and time again that marriage is a right.