Gay marriage before Supreme Court? Cases weighed – Yahoo! News.
The Supreme Court will decide whether it will finally take up the issue of gay marriage for the entire country or not and a few lines from this article say it all:
Throughout U.S. history, the court has tried to avoid getting too far ahead of public opinion and mores. The high court waited until 1967 to strike down laws against interracial marriage in the 16 states that still had them…”What do they have to gain by hearing this case? Either they impose same sex marriage on the whole country, which would create a political firestorm, or they say there’s no right to same-sex marriage, in which case they are going to be reversed in 20 years and be badly remembered. They’ll be the villains in the historical narrative,” said Andrew Koppelman, a professor of law and political science at Northwestern University.
The truly wrongheaded thinking here is that the political firestorm would be such a bad thing. The professor is definitely right about the outcomes he is suggesting but the question that should be asked here is, what do we truly have to fear from this so-called firestorm? Will there be rioting? Looting? A zombie apocalypse? Will team Edward or Jacob rise to victory?
The fact is we are admitting a decision against gay marriage will be overturned at some point in the near future and will be forever frowned upon by the generations to come. So why not just get to the equal-for-all part of this issue by legalizing it nationwide now? Even if there is a firestorm, why should anyone fear it?
The only element stopping this decision from already being made is the inability of people to change their minds and come to grips with the reality gay marriage is just fine and is fair for those currently being oppressed. Why should the country be held back in progressing toward equality because a shrinking minority of people think the wrong way on a certain issue?
It’s sad the Supreme Court has chosen cowardice over justice for so long on gay rights and may continue to do so. It’s even more heartbreaking our generation will be burdened with this ideology being associated with us in the forthcoming history books just as the Supreme Court decisions of the 1800s regarding slavery and Jim Crow laws will forever be intertwined with American beliefs of that century. It’s a disgrace that only a tiny group of people have the power and ability to change and they still seem to be too afraid to do what is right.
Another appeals court has essentially pointed out the reality the marriage rules in the United States are unequal and they need to change. The facts surrounding this area are covered well in the article but the key is the pressure is continuing to mount on the Supreme Court to address this issue and no longer dodge the inevitable decision it will make legalizing gay marriage across the country.
DOMA is clearly an unconstitutional piece of legislation along with the state constitutional amendments banning gay marriage and enough rulings have been made that the writing should be on the wall for everyone where this issue is headed and what the outcome will be when the highest court renders its decision. In this way, the Constitution is much like the Bible for the people strongly against gay marriage. They defend the Constitution and the principles within it…until the reality hits them there is something it says that goes so blatantly against what they believe. Gay marriage will be legalized once the Supreme Court decides to take the issue on, the language in the Constitution will be the reason it will be legalized, and the country will be better off in the long run because of it.
A federal appeals court unanimously decided DOMA is unconstitutional today edging the United States one step closer to an inevitability: nationally legalized gay marriage.
The reality of gay marriage has always been that it should be recognized as legal because of the Constitution and the fact it has been outlawed and restricted in different states and still not recognized as equal to hetero marriage is ridiculous. There is little doubt that in time (as Fox’s Shepard Smith said) the opponents of gay marriage will be on the wrong side of history on this and the videos of people demeaning the homosexual community will be looked upon with scorn similar to the videos we now watch of past segregationists.
Some may say this debate is different at its core. It’s not. Both were about equality and gaining rights a majority of the country possesses and a smaller portion does not. The idea each person should have the same rights as the next is not radical or evil or unholy. It’s in the Constitution and is not really arguable.
Which is why the opponents of gay marriage wanted the Constitutional amendment banning it so badly. Despite the fact it was a pipe dream in terms of passing from the beginning, the opponents knew a day would come when the courts would rule on this issue and the courts would have no choice how to rule on it no matter who the judges were. They could scream about activist judges all they want but today is indicative of what they knew. Three judges ruled in favor of gay rights and two were appointed by Republican presidents.
When it comes down to the bare bones of this debate it is simply a belief in a rite versus actual rights. One has a legal reason for being. The other is just a symbol in our minds left to be interpreted in whatever way pleases our consciences and beliefs. Letting rituals be the basis for decision making and not proper equality in law reeks of a society of the simple minded too afraid of change to embrace the idea of treating law abiding citizens the same.
One of the realities of this fight is just a simple fact of politics: politicians need targets to fire up people for their election prospects. They need bogeymen and the best ones to rail against are the ones with little or no rights and power because they can’t be hurt as badly by them. Illegal immigrants and criminals are perfect examples of this. What does a politician have to lose by saying anything vile about these folks? They can’t vote so what does a politician care when he knows he can light a fire in his constituents by saying how tough he will be on this group of people regardless of how inefficient it might be? The gay community has been similarly demonized because of the bigotry toward them and this gave politicians another target. And since gays are a relatively small portion of the population, there has been little risk in attacking them in the interest of getting elected.
But, happily, that’s changing and changing quickly now. For now, we’ll just have to wait and see if the Supreme Court will take this case on and bring it to its logical conclusion: true equality in marriage across the U.S.