See How It Works!
US41 - Gay Marriage by Federal Statute
| Legalize gay marriage by federal statute. Denying gay marriage is clearly unconstitutional on equal protection grounds. | |
|
|
|
   
|
|
Description
People should be free to marry whomever they want. It is meaningful symbolically and it also entails access to numerous benefits, e.g., ownership, inheritance, insurance coverage.
Arguments
People do not have control over being gay, and it is unfair to deny rights based on a person's inborn characteristics. Discriminating based on sexual orientation is the same as discriminating based on gender or race.
Human rights > States' rights. No one should be denied equal rights for ANY reason, no matter which governing body is supposed to rule on these.
The Constitution, while overall a well-written ruling document, is flawed in the sense that it lets the states determine some individual liberties. Majorities of bigots should never have the ability to negatively affect other persons' lives just because of their beliefs.
The Constitution, while overall a well-written ruling document, is flawed in the sense that it lets the states determine some individual liberties. Majorities of bigots should never have the ability to negatively affect other persons' lives just because of their beliefs.
There are Federal guarantees of domestic rights.
Griswold - Right to birth control
Eisenstadt - Unmarried people can have birth control
Lawrence - Sodomy if you want to
GregOrr - Same-sex couples can get married
If something is a Constitutional right, Congress can pass a law saying that no state can violate that right. Correct? Possibly superfluous logically, but fine all the same.
Discrimination is discrimination, whatever it pertains to today. Ask a minority. Ask a woman. It is still rampant and alive, and it is STILL WRONG!
I am a lesbian woman and legally married in the state of NH. I didn't ask to be gay or to be discriminated against......it should be federal law!
For far too long, marriage and the basic rights of recognized relationships have been limited to straight couples. Civil marriage is a government institution, not a religious one. When a couple is granted a marriage license in a state, they are subsequently granted more than 1,000 federal rights and hundreds of additional state rights, including medical treatment, hospital visitation, employee benefits for families, parenting rights and custodial protections. Kirsten believes everyone should be able to marry the person they love and that being part of a family is a basic right. She looks forward to the day that our country accepts this basic principle of fairness.
Source: kirstengillibrand.com
Source: kirstengillibrand.com
This is one of the reasons why I find state rights to be completely pointless. Why must we assert that people should only have certain rights in specific areas and not have them in others? Imagine there's a same-sex couple living in Texas that can't be married because of all those Bible-thumping Christians down there, what should we say to them? "Oh, just spend your money, ditch your family and friends, move to New England, Iowa or Washington, get yourselves wed there and enjoy all the benefits that come with it." That's total BS. People from all walks of life deserve the same rights regardless of where they were born and where they are living. Using imaginary borders to decide someone's life is inhumane and I fail to see why people find it ideal to bring this to the state level.
Counterarguments
I'm all for the federal government legalizing gay marriage, but would such a law be constitutional? In finding certain provisions of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional, a federal court found that states have the authority to regulate and define marriage, because marital status determinations traditionally have been viewed as falling within a state’s sovereign power. I'm not sure if this is the way it has to be, or just the way it traditionally has been, but a federal law legalizing gay marriage might be unconstitutional.
Marriage is from God and he made Man for Women not vice versa. I dont think Gay is a race for you to think its like discrimination of one. It's just a fad. I'm sure half the people who act gay are not even gay.. But I sure as hell don't want my kids growing up around that bad enough people dont have respect for the children right now.
Marriage is not defined by the Constitution, and thus, under the 10th Amendment, this falls under the jurisdiction of the States. It would thus be unconstitutional to pass such an amendment.
Further, licenses for marriages are issued by the state, not by the federal government. It is clear that the authority to define marriage ends at the state level.
Further, licenses for marriages are issued by the state, not by the federal government. It is clear that the authority to define marriage ends at the state level.
- This is unconstitutional because of the Tenth Amendment. Marriage only became a legal entity in this Country because of the impact of traditional families have had on American society in the past. It's been positive in attention procreation and that's why the States' often recognize it legally because of its relation to human nature. Gay marriage completely undermines this to the extent, it makes it worthless to have marriage as a legal entity.
6 Topics
Discussion
started
by GregOrr
on Sep 14
Can Congress pass laws to protect Constitutional rights?
There's an unresolved question from our discussions: Is Congress allowed to pass laws to protect citizens' Constitutional rights from conflicting state laws? Or does Congress always have to wait for the Supreme Court to strike down these unconstitutional laws? What if it's subject matter for which there is no other Constitutional hook (e.g., applying to persons involved in Interstate Commerce) giving Congress the right to make laws? Does Congress have a right to protect its citizens' Constitutional rights, as it understands them, unless/until contradicted by the Federal Courts?
started
by GregOrr
on May 17
Gay marriage doesn't change heterosexual marriage at all
First, it's not unconstitutional. The 14th Amendment guarantees equal protection under the law, so the states are not allowed deny rights and privileges to particular groups based on their inborn characteristics. Federal civil rights laws are constitutional for the same reason.
Second, you say that gay marriage makes marriage worthless. That doesn't make sense -- allowing gay people to marry does not change heterosexual marriage one bit.
started
by GregOrr
on May 9
Constitutional like Equal Employment Opportunity laws
Related Ideas
| Marriage as an institution should be available to same sex couples who wish to celebrate their relationship. More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Repeal the Defense of Marriage Act More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Require the U.S. federal government to recognize the validity of same-sex marriages More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Congress should pass statutes to protect Constitutional rights More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Make gay marriage a federal law More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Federal Marriage Amendment saying "Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman" More detail | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
gay marraige