Marriage in the Context of US Constitution

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by Cenotaph, Jun 4, 2012.

  1. Cenotaph
    Offline

    Cenotaph 2+2=4

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    239
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +36
    This addresses everything:

    • The special benefits given to married couples - why they should/shouldn't receive them
    • The inability for same-sex marriage to be legally recognized in certain states
    • The idea that marriage is or isn't a right
    • Etc

    Thoughts, opinions?

    Try to keep it civil...
     
  2. C_Clayton_Jones
    Online

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,933
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,869
    The consistent application of equal protection doctrine compels the states to allow same-sex couples equal access to marriage law. With regard to Perry v. Brown (‘prop 8’), for example, the state of California failed to demonstrate a compelling reason to disallow same-sex couples equal protection of the law and failed to provide evidence in support of its opposition.

    As in any court of law, it’s only a matter of what can be objectively proven, not a matter of subjective opinion.

    It’s settled law that marriage is a fundamental right, in the context of the right to privacy. This is why such issues as procreation and whether one ‘chooses’ to be gay or not are irrelevant.
     
  3. Cenotaph
    Offline

    Cenotaph 2+2=4

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    239
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +36
    I'm honestly surprised by the lack of participation in this thread... I would expect everyone would be all over this.
     
  4. WinterBorn
    Offline

    WinterBorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2011
    Messages:
    16,057
    Thanks Received:
    2,485
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Atlanta
    Ratings:
    +6,822
    I think those who typically oppose gay marriage have been slapped silly on too many threads.

    Either that or they haven't noticed this one.
     
  5. Katzndogz
    Offline

    Katzndogz Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2011
    Messages:
    65,659
    Thanks Received:
    7,418
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +8,337
    Since the Constitution is silent on the issue of marriage, its regulation is a function of the states.
     
  6. gallantwarrior
    Offline

    gallantwarrior Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2011
    Messages:
    18,797
    Thanks Received:
    3,610
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    So far in the boonies, I'm not on google street vi
    Ratings:
    +6,137
    They've been all over this, repeatedly. Unfortunately, this topic tends to degenerate into a name-calling contest among a very few participants. I personally check out when that stage is reached.
     
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2012
  7. Cenotaph
    Offline

    Cenotaph 2+2=4

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    239
    Thanks Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    31
    Ratings:
    +36
    I've noticed that this happens a lot on this forum. :lol:
     
  8. Moonglow
    Online

    Moonglow Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2011
    Messages:
    81,818
    Thanks Received:
    8,022
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    sw mizzouri
    Ratings:
    +29,506
    we must remember that the daily philosophy an mindset of Americans 250 years ago was and is not the same as today. I believe you have people that lived 250 years ago that was under the idea thatonly a preist could marry you, peer pressure from society would not allow certain things to happen, ie; interracial partners, same sex, why even protestants and catholics did not marry.
    The Constitution holds no rules on marriage. I believe at the time of the FF the church controlled that destiny, why you did not even need a license.
    The states did not legislate marriage until the early 1800's, so they really didn't think it was thier area to manage.
    I believe the set up we have today by the govt. is a system which allows the state to record and license the activity, they do not marry you. They(the state) should not have the right to refuse marrige to anyone that wants it.
     
  9. WorldWatcher
    Offline

    WorldWatcher Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2010
    Messages:
    6,971
    Thanks Received:
    1,275
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    VA
    Ratings:
    +1,905

    Your first mistake is using the term "marriage", use of that term opens the thread to deflection with statements that same-sex couples can be "married" just that it is not recognized by the state. "Marriage" effectively exists in two realms: Religious Marriage and Civil Marriage.

    Religious Marriage is a status that exists between individuals and is recognized by they selected religious organization. Technically speaking, same-sex couples can enter into Religious Marriage and if they don't complete (or do not have access to Civil Marriage) then they are "married" just not legally.

    Civil Marriage on the other hand is the context of these discussions, is the legal status entered into by two individuals which is recognized by the government establishing a family relationship where one did not exist before. Just as Religious Marriage can exist outside the context of Civil Marriage, Civil Marriage can exist outside the context of religion.


    >>>>
     
  10. code1211
    Offline

    code1211 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2009
    Messages:
    5,999
    Thanks Received:
    845
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +845


    Marriage does not exist as a topic in the US Constitution except under the very broad States Rights Clause.

    In this way, it is exactly like Abortion.
     

Share This Page