America is a progressive nation. We have led the charge in the modernization
of industry and technology. We have led
the charge on the rights for citizens, and have done so by making personal
liberty the priority first and foremost.
Freedom and liberty are evident in everything we do. It is not limited to business, or specific
types of people. It’s for everyone to
enjoy. Although we are too quick to only
reminisce on the good and look past the bad.
We can all rejoice at our accomplishments, but I know I’ve learned the
most important lessons in my life from mistakes that I’ve made.
As a country I believe we are faced with a challenge right
now. In the past 150 years we have grown
from a people that enslave others, from a people that doesn’t hold everyone
equal in the eyes of the law, and from a people that do not believe all of us
are created equal. Those wrongs have
been righted. We learned from our
mistakes, and the country is better because of it. I believe that the question of same sex
marriage falls into this same category. I
believe the argument against it is based on religious beliefs. It’s important to take a step back and view
this issue in a constitutional framework.
From here we can deem if there is any legality against this same sex
marriage and determine a political approach to potential implementation.
Constitutional Argument
Applicable amendments.
1st- Protects freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and
freedom of the press….
Easily the most cited amendment. Most relevant is freedom of speech which is
defined as such, right to communicate one’s opinions and ideas using one’s body
and property to anyone who is willing to receive them. I think what is most important is the fact
that freedom of speech and freedom of religion are included in the same
amendment. The opponents of same sex
marriage often cite religious reasons on why it is immoral. I don’t believe that this is truly
applicable, because how would same sex marriage impede against an individual’s
ability to freely practice his/her religion.
There are many things that are legal in the country that do not coincide
with religion. For instance, businesses
that are open on Sundays. The 4th
commandment clearly states that Sunday is a day of rest, in which you are not
to work.
Point being, we can’t pick and choose certain statements
from a certain religious text whenever the 1st amendment clearly
states that there is a freedom of religion.
Meaning not one single religion is adopted and enforced by the
government. A level of openness is
encouraged. So the argument against same
sex marriage based on religious beliefs is an opinion and nothing more. It’s not a constitutional argument and should
not hold any ground in the legal argument for or against same sex marriage.
***One argument I’ve read about is that if same sex marriage
was legalized in a particular state there would have to be venue’s in which
these people could get married.
Obviously people want to get married in churches, so religious
organizations worry about being persecuted for denying same sex marriages to
occur in their parishes. I would tend to
agree with the churches in this instance, a provision would be needed to ensure
no persecution or mandate would occur to force a religious entity to violate its
beliefs.
14th- Defines citizenship, contains the Privileges or
Immunities clause, the Due process clause, the Equal Protection clause…
Gender discrimination and race discrimination
received its legal footing through this amendment. Historical societal shifts have backed this
up and have added appropriate change to the way we view minority inhabitants of
the country. Individual homosexuals have
the same rights as any other citizen.
They are viewed equal in the eye of the law. So why would they not be seen equally in
front of the law if they are married?
That is like not allowing interracial marriages to occur, and if they
did occur without state consent then no state or federal benefits would be
provided. This would be viewed, and in
the past has been viewed, as unconstitutional.
Constitutional Summary
With section 3 of DOMA being repealed (defines what
constitutes marriage) the question of same sex marriage has no legal roadblock
to being enacted. State and Federal
marriage benefits should be provided, with proper documentation, to same sex
spouses in states that have legalized same sex marriage. I don’t believe that a Federal overhaul is appropriate
though, the decision should be left to the popular vote on a state by state
basis.
Political Argument
The Republican Party have backed themselves into a corner on
this issue. They have positioned
themselves around anti gay and anti same sex marriage groups like the Faith and
Freedom Coalition, which only further alienates the Party from the moderate
vote.
I’ve wrote about the shift in voter classification before. As a recap, what’s happened instead of having
the country split 50/50 Republican and Democrat we now have a three prong distribution. Voters that classify themselves as
Republicans are in the 30% range. The
other 20% are moderates. The challenge in
every election is to capture the moderate vote, and by doing so you need to
adapt your platform to appeal to a broader range of voters. More often than not, you compromise on core
party principles. So you risk the
alienation of your long term base in order to capture more of the swing voters.
So the Republicans are in a bad position now. They receive significant financial support
from special interest groups that are very passionate about specific
fundamental Republican platforms. The
institution of marriage is a huge item for a majority of these groups. The risk of funding being cut off is huge,
and there is also a big risk of losing voters as well. Being cut off financially hurts your ability
to effectively campaign. If you can’t
fund your campaign, then you can’t get your message out to new voters. It would lead to another failure in the next
round of elections for the party.
So what can you do? The party is need of a facelift, results
have proven that. A more modern platform
would be appropriate. At the end of the
day, you can have all the funding you want but if you can’t get votes then you
don’t have a majority. Without a
majority, you don’t have power. So the
party needs to get in front of this issue and embrace it. In order to compromise and satisfy its
current voters they need to support it on a state by state basis. This is not a decision to be made by the
federal government. States need to lead
the charge and ride the shift in public opinion to a majority of the States
legalizing same sex marriage. If they
take this approach they will lose support from the fundamentalist religious groups
but they maintain their support from voters who do not want an over reaching
federal government. It’s the lesser of
two evils, and gives the party the best chance to retain its voter base and not
alienate the moderates.
Summary
Politically and constitutionally same sex marriage can occur
on a state by state basis. The repeal of
DOMA section 3 is a victory for the movement and should move people to view
this issue in a different light. At the
end of the day, all citizens have the right to life, liberty, and pursuit of
happiness. We are better than the
prejudices of the past. The abolishment
of slavery and the repeal of Jim Crow Laws show that we can learn from our
mistakes. It’s the bad we so often
forget. The country needs to learn from
our mistakes on same sex marriage rights.
Public opinion is what can shift it, so make the right choice and
support the cause.
You are certainly correct that the republican party needs to rethink their blunt one sided views, or a face lift as u put, in this issue. Public opinion forms associations, associations fund political campaigns, these campaigns are often times won by having the most money, which results in political figures following suit when it comes to policy votes. That being said where does the issue stem in this process? I believe you are accurate with saying public opinion needs to change. But how so? Ask yourself how many gay married/together couples with children do you know? I personally don't know any. so know ask yourself what is the stereotypically thought about gays...does the word flamboyant come to mind...I'd say yes. when the unfamiliarity in reality clashes with an unpleasant stereotype, Americans let their imagination, more times then none, come up with undesirable outcome, however jaded it may be.
ReplyDeletepublic opinion needs to be changed through normalcy. we need to view same sex marriage as something that is normal in society and so far we have not found it, despite certain media attempts. how does this change...well that is a discussion within its self. less of a political view but rather a discussion on human rationale. which could be interesting, no?