Stifling the Constitution

Stifling the Constitution

            It is not a matter of gay rights but of basic human rights for a person to love and marry whomever they choose. I believe that same sex marriage should be allowed everywhere in the United States of America. The opposition believes that the sanctity of marriage should be left to heterosexual couples. It is unconstitutional for the government to dictate whom a person can marry, based on sexual orientation. Equality amongst all Americans is what is important, regardless of race, gender or sexual orientation.

            It is unconstitutional for the United States government to bar same sex marriages. They have made legislature stating that same sex couples and marriages will not be allowed or acknowledged. In 1996, then President Bill Clinton signed into effect the Defense of Marriage Act or DOMA; which states that, “In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife” (Congress). Its enactment was brought on by Georgia representative Bob Barr who wrote the Act and President Bill Clinton, who is a democrat willingly supported it stating that he has long since been against same sex marriage. DOMA violates constitutional protections that forbid the Government from discriminating. One way it does this is by, “…creating disfavored, second-class citizens—and disfavored, second-class marriages. Such

unconstitutional election-year bills appeal to anti-gay disapproval, dislike, or discomfort the very animus rejected by the Supreme Court as a basis for government discrimination” (Dickson). This Act perpetuates hatred towards the gay community. It rates them as like the quote says, “second-class citizens”. They do not qualify to have the same rights as the rest of Americans, to love and marry who they choose to. It is a discriminatory Act, which the federal government has no place uphold because it goes against The Constitution’s Equal Protection Clause, which states that “...no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privilege or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” (Unknown). This states that we are all to be treated equally under the same laws and are not to be discriminated against. Thankfully, times are slowly changing. President Barack Obama is a strong leader for the cause of equality. During his tenure he has helped take away the stigmatism of being gay by abolishing the “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy; which disallowed gays in the military. While he was running for Presidency in 2008 he, “…presented himself as a strong proponent of ‘full equality’ for ‘LGBT people’—the current term of art, awkward but inclusive, for lesbians, gays, bisexuals, and transgendered people” (Hertzberg). He has helped make strides for the gay community and in recent times, “In a major policy reversal, the Obama administration said Wednesday it will no longer defend the constitutionality of a federal law banning recognition of same-sex marriage” (Post). DOMA still stands, but at least the President has realized that it is unconstitutional and in time hopefully it will be taken out and not be defended whatsoever.

            A few states are on their way to liberate the rights of their people. The State of Massachusetts on May 17, 2004 made same sex marriage legal stating that not allowing same sex marriage, “Barred access to the protections, benefits, and obligations of civil marriage, a person who enters into an intimate, exclusive union with another of the same sex is arbitrarily deprived of membership in one of our community's most rewarding and cherished institutions. That exclusion is incompatible with the constitutional principles of respect for individual autonomy and equality under law" (Massachusetts). They found that even though DOMA exists, it is unconstitutional to the rights of their people and under Massachusetts’s constitution not allowing same sex couples to marry places them as unequal persons. Illinois has tried to follow suit, among some other States to allow what is known as a civil union. A civil union is a legal entity that offers same-sex couples the same legal rights and benefits as marriage, like hospital visitation of a sick spouse and tax relief, emergency medical decision-making power and access to domestic relations laws and procedure amongst other benefits. Other states have acknowledged domestic partnerships between same sex couples, one of those being California. A domestic partnership is like marriage in that it shows you are over the age of 18, are in a committed relationship and it as well offers some of the same benefits of marriage and a civil union those being  medical decisions making powers et al. In the November 2008 elections the state of California passed Proposition 8 which added a new provision to the California Constitution, which provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Subsequently under much heated scrutiny and many lawsuits filed challenging the proposition’s validity on February 7, 2012 a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals panel declared Proposition 8’s ban on same sex marriage to be unconstitutional. In our home State of Colorado, a civil union’s bill made it through the Senate on April 25, 2012 but it still needs to go through the House. With any luck and open-mindedness the State of Colorado will move forward and allow civil unions; eventually same sex marriages as well.

            Not allowing same sex marriage perpetuates discrimination against homosexuals. In fact, it is pure homophobia that keeps same-sex marriage from not happening. Our politicians use their own personal and religious beliefs as a deciding factor when it comes to allowing civil unions, same-sex marriage or domestic partnerships when their decisions should be made on what is equally right, what The Constitution says and our laws about equal treatment for all our citizens. Everyone deserves the benefits of marriage, which not only include state and federal recognition of you and your partners commitment to another but other such benefits as; tax, estate planning, government, employment, medical, death, family, housing, consumer,  and other legal benefits and protections such as visiting rights in jails and other places where visitors are restricted to immediate family.

            There was a time when inter-racial couples and inter-racial marriage were seen in the same light as same-sex marriage. People thought that it would ruin the sanctity of marriage and that those marriages would take away from what was so honored in marriage. People believed that the divorce rates would be increased and that children of inter-racial couples would not have the same wholesome upbringing as same raced couples. The very same rhetoric that was used during the civil rights era to keep inter-racial couples from being together is being used today to ban same sex marriage. “The arguments white supremacists used to justify for miscegenation laws--that interracial marriages were contrary to God's will or somehow unnatural--are echoed today by the most conservative opponents of same-sex marriage” (Pascoe). I believe it is only a matter of time before our generation comes together and realizes how unconstitutional, narrow minded and just wrong we are being by not allowing same-sex marriage. This topic is has always been important to me not only because I believe in equality, but because my youngest brother is gay. I watched him go through realizing who he was and supported him. I get very upset with the homophobic attitudes of people who do not understand and even more upset when their attitudes are justified by their beliefs in God and the Bible. Nobody chooses who they are; they are just born that way. I know my brother would not have chosen to be a societal minority and have to fight for rights that should be available to everyone.  My gay brother, his boyfriend, my boyfriend’s youngest brother, who is gay and every lesbian, bi-sexual or transgendered person deserves to be treated as an equal and have the same life, liberty and pursuit of happiness The Constitution speaks of that I do.

Works Cited

Congress. Bill Text: H.R. 3396.ENR, Defense of Marriage Act. 21 September 1996. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c104:H.R.3396.ENR:. 23 April 2012.

Dickson, Diana. "Why Federal DOMA is Unconstitutional." 24 March 2004. United Church of Christ http://www.ucc.org/assets/pdfs/emr21.pdf. PDF. 23 April 2012.

Hertzberg, Henrik. "Stonewall Plus Forty." The New Yorker (2009). http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/2009/07/06/090706taco_talk_hertzberg.

Massachusetts, Law Library of the State of. Massachusetts Trial Court Law Library. 17 May 2004. Webpage; http://www.lawlib.state.ma.us/subject/about/gaymarriage.html#main. 29 April 2012.

Pascoe, Peggy. "Why the Ugly Rhetoric Against Gay Marriage Is Familiar to this Historian of Miscegenation." George Mason University's History News Network (2004). Webpage; http://hnn.us/articles/4708.html.

Post, AP/The Huffington. Obama: DOMA Unconstitutional, DOJ Should Stop Defending In Court . 23 February 2011. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/obama-doma-unconstitutional_n_827134.html?view=screen. 23 April 2012.

Unknown. Judicial Interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment. n.d. http://www.uscourts.gov/EducationalResources/ConstitutionResources/LegalLandmarks/JudicialInterpretationFourteenthAmmendment.aspx. 23 April 2012.