Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I used this in another thread and it applies here.. There is no way constitutionally that one state can have gays married and another can't.. They can NOT provide gays a marriage license, but they HAVE to recognize a gay marriage performed in another state...
if my partner and I are married in Iowa and my job transfers us to Idaho.. Idaho doesn't have the right to tell us we're not married anymore.. They HAVE to recognize our marriage.. that's not how it is now, and it's unconstitutional.. the courts will fix this and there will be gays married everywhere.. whether or not they were married in that state or not..
If the only thing the government does is certify the marriage, how can any state not recognize that? There are no states that don't recognize birth certificates.
States do not recognize licenses all the time, just look at drivers, contractors etc. A license equals control.
I used this in another thread and it applies here.. There is no way constitutionally that one state can have gays married and another can't.. They can NOT provide gays a marriage license, but they HAVE to recognize a gay marriage performed in another state...
if my partner and I are married in Iowa and my job transfers us to Idaho.. Idaho doesn't have the right to tell us we're not married anymore.. They HAVE to recognize our marriage.. that's not how it is now, and it's unconstitutional.. the courts will fix this and there will be gays married everywhere.. whether or not they were married in that state or not..
This is an interesting take on the situation. It would have been a good addition to the gay marriage threads in the Great Debates forum. I'm not necessarily a gay marriage supporter since I believe government shouldn't be in the marriage business, but I think the Full Faith and Credit Clause angle is a winner for gay marriage advocates if it were argued before the U.S. Supreme Court. Even strict Constitutionalist justices would have to go with it or be deemed partisan.
Last edited by Freedom123; 02-12-2011 at 11:17 PM..
I used this in another thread and it applies here.. There is no way constitutionally that one state can have gays married and another can't.. They can NOT provide gays a marriage license, but they HAVE to recognize a gay marriage performed in another state...
if my partner and I are married in Iowa and my job transfers us to Idaho.. Idaho doesn't have the right to tell us we're not married anymore.. They HAVE to recognize our marriage.. that's not how it is now, and it's unconstitutional.. the courts will fix this and there will be gays married everywhere.. whether or not they were married in that state or not..
Actually, there is no marriage compact between states. It is becoming such a fiasco however, there will have be. Meanwhile, take Va. for example. It simply will not recognize a gay marriage performed in another state. I would not count on a Va. court however simpathetic the judges are personally, to recognize a gay marriage performed elsewhere. It is in the Va. State Constitution (absurdly in the State Bill of Rights) that marriage is only between a man and woman and only the US Supreme Court can overrule that.
Actually, there is no marriage compact between states. It is becoming such a fiasco however, there will have be. Meanwhile, take Va. for example. It simply will not recognize a gay marriage performed in another state. I would not count on a Va. court however simpathetic the judges are personally, to recognize a gay marriage performed elsewhere. It is in the Va. State Constitution (absurdly in the State Bill of Rights) that marriage is only between a man and woman and only the US Supreme Court can overrule that.
isn't this where all great debates have ended up though? when I say.. in due time.. this is what I mean.. it will get to the supreme court.. and unfortunately for those opposed to gay marriage in their state.. it's going to be VERY hard to make a case against it legally. I wouldn't go so far as to say every state will be forced to give out marriage licenses to gays, but they will have to recognize those performed elsewhere, essentially voiding state constitutional amendments.. Like I said, there are obligations a state has in being a member of the union.. you can't abandon those obligations because you don't like something ruled unconstitutional federally. It will happen.. The only thing blocking the full faith and credit clause from applying now is the Defense of Marriage act.. which in itself is unconstitutional, but remains the intact because it's challenge has not reached the respective courts yet
If the only thing the government does is certify the marriage, how can any state not recognize that? There are no states that don't recognize birth certificates.
States do not recognize licenses all the time, just look at drivers, contractors etc. A license equals control.
but if a state recognizes one person's marriage the context of all marriages apply.. I don't know of any state in the union that doesn't recognize straight people being married in another state. It falls under the full faith and credit clause. SOOO essentially gay marriages performed in states that allow them should be recognized by states that do not. States have been able to put these silly constitutional amendments in place and what not to stop it..and it's only worked because the issue hasn't been addressed federally. When it does it will be hard for states to make a case that a gay marriage from Iowa is different than a straight marriage from Iowa, and how they can get away with recognizing ONE and not another and still be in compliance with full faith and credit?
Actually, there is no marriage compact between states. It is becoming such a fiasco however, there will have be. Meanwhile, take Va. for example. It simply will not recognize a gay marriage performed in another state. I would not count on a Va. court however simpathetic the judges are personally, to recognize a gay marriage performed elsewhere. It is in the Va. State Constitution (absurdly in the State Bill of Rights) that marriage is only between a man and woman and only the US Supreme Court can overrule that.
yes there is.. it's the full faith and credit clause of the United states constitution...
but if a state recognizes one person's marriage the context of all marriages apply.. I don't know of any state in the union that doesn't recognize straight people being married in another state. It falls under the full faith and credit clause. SOOO essentially gay marriages performed in states that allow them should be recognized by states that do not. States have been able to put these silly constitutional amendments in place and what not to stop it..and it's only worked because the issue hasn't been addressed federally. When it does it will be hard for states to make a case that a gay marriage from Iowa is different than a straight marriage from Iowa, and how they can get away with recognizing ONE and not another and still be in compliance with full faith and credit?
The problem with keeping it at the permission (licensing) level is it could easily be argued that people who move to a new state need to get their marriage re-licensed after a certain period of time, just as they do with drivers and contractors licenses. This is where constitutional amendments could cause problems.
A certificate can't be renewed, no one renews a birth certificate. An act (marriage or birth) either took place or it didn’t.
If states thought that they could re-license people who move in they will, even if it is just for the revenue generation.
The problem with keeping it at the permission (licensing) level is it could easily be argued that people who move to a new state need to get their marriage re-licensed after a certain period of time, just as they do with drivers and contractors licenses. This is where constitutional amendments could cause problems.
A certificate can't be renewed, no one renews a birth certificate. An act (marriage or birth) either took place or it didn’t.
If states thought that they could re-license people who move in they will, even if it is just for the revenue generation.
we call it a marriage license so logically people would associate it with the likes of a drivers license. It's not the same legally and not governed the same. In fact it is considered a marriage certificate much like a birth certificate in most states. It is a binding contract in a court of law that carries obligations to both parties involved which is why you can't just get married and make a simple phone call to cancel your marriage license even if you both did.. You must go before the courts to end your marriage. No state has the ability to void someone's marriage because of Jurisdiction purposes..that will never happen Full faith and Credit protects that. Which is why it will be hard for a state to accept one couple's marriage from another state, and not another couple's marriage from the same state.. whether it's between two men or a man and a woman. When you look at the law..the courts will HAVE to rule in favor of all states AT LEAST recognizing gay marriages performed in the United States.. thus making individual state constitutional amendments void..
I've long thought that what the state should do, all states recognizing all other states, is a domestic partership regrestration. It includes all the rights of marriage. No ceremony is necessary. For some this would be sufficent. For those who need more, they can marry. It can be done in a church or a civil ceremony or public proclomation. But you could marry without the benefits if you wanted or you could get the benefits without the public ceremony or you could do both. No limits as long as both are adults and not direct relatives. Churches who object could refuse to marry gays or people of different races and so on but there will be plenty of choices.
Those who want to control can do so but only as far as their own small ponds.
I also think at say five years and ten years, a partnership could be legally dissolved along set lines without the complexity of filing for divorce. Each couple knows the time to decide will come and can do so without extra steps, and protection for children and support would be required.
we call it a marriage license so logically people would associate it with the likes of a drivers license. It's not the same legally and not governed the same. In fact it is considered a marriage certificate much like a birth certificate in most states. It is a binding contract in a court of law that carries obligations to both parties involved which is why you can't just get married and make a simple phone call to cancel your marriage license even if you both did.. You must go before the courts to end your marriage. No state has the ability to void someone's marriage because of Jurisdiction purposes..that will never happen Full faith and Credit protects that. Which is why it will be hard for a state to accept one couple's marriage from another state, and not another couple's marriage from the same state.. whether it's between two men or a man and a woman. When you look at the law..the courts will HAVE to rule in favor of all states AT LEAST recognizing gay marriages performed in the United States.. thus making individual state constitutional amendments void..
The main reason marriage licenses came about was to restrict interracial marriage; it would seem that it still holds the power to restrict. I still like the certificate idea for one because I hate the state in involved in my marriage and two; it would make things a lot easier for all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
