Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-24-2015, 06:06 PM
 
944 posts, read 1,177,485 times
Reputation: 661

Advertisements

What I find more than amusing, is that people are up in arms thinking the judge actually made it a law (reading the comments on AL.com's FB)...which she didn't - she just ruled it unconstitutional, and we all know how much people love their constitutional rights!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-26-2015, 07:23 AM
 
614 posts, read 760,495 times
Reputation: 659
I will join in with my one post in this thread: I believe in States rights. This should be an Alabama issue, put to the voters of Alabama. Period. The US constitution is specific on what the fed Gov should be involved with and this issue aint one of them.

Let Alabama speak for Alabama and let the other states do the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 11:46 AM
 
2,513 posts, read 2,769,080 times
Reputation: 1739
I have no problems with Gay Marriage.

What I do have a problem is with Judges who sit on the bench legislating.

There is nothing in the constitution giving the Federal government the power to marry or dictate marriage laws. This falls to the state.

Fundamentally, the correct legal way to do this is for an amendment to the federal constitution to be passed unifying all the various states marriage laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 11:49 AM
 
2,513 posts, read 2,769,080 times
Reputation: 1739
Quote:
Originally Posted by Becky2517 View Post
What I find more than amusing, is that people are up in arms thinking the judge actually made it a law (reading the comments on AL.com's FB)...which she didn't - she just ruled it unconstitutional, and we all know how much people love their constitutional rights!
Federal judge is overstepping. A federal judge has no business deciding state constitutionality when the Federal Government doesn't have any laws in pertaining to marriage.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 02:12 PM
 
Location: Madison, AL
3,297 posts, read 6,232,149 times
Reputation: 2678
Here is the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment since everyone is talking about constitutionality:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges 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

The federal judge determined that AL's state law banning same sex marriage violated those AL citizen's 14th amendment rights. Its the same amendment that was used in civil rights. The judge did not create a law (which is "legislating from the bench"), she just stated an existing law violated the US Constitution, which is precisely what the 14th Amendment is for. It has nothing to do with whether the federal government has laws pertaining to marriage or not.

This does not necessarily legalize same sex marriage in AL at this point. Its a little murky what this actually will do, which is one reason the stay was issued. Will local probate judges grant marriage licenses? Will the state actually recognize those licenses? But, as of now, there has been no state law legalizing it like in other states. Jefferson County said they would issue the licenses, other counties around the state have said they would not. Its a bit ambiguous right now.

Last edited by LCTMadison; 01-26-2015 at 02:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 03:27 PM
 
2,513 posts, read 2,769,080 times
Reputation: 1739
Quote:
Originally Posted by LCTMadison View Post
Here is the Equal Protection clause in the 14th Amendment since everyone is talking about constitutionality:

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges 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

The federal judge determined that AL's state law banning same sex marriage violated those AL citizen's 14th amendment rights. Its the same amendment that was used in civil rights. The judge did not create a law (which is "legislating from the bench"), she just stated an existing law violated the US Constitution, which is precisely what the 14th Amendment is for. It has nothing to do with whether the federal government has laws pertaining to marriage or not.

This does not necessarily legalize same sex marriage in AL at this point. Its a little murky what this actually will do, which is one reason the stay was issued. Will local probate judges grant marriage licenses? Will the state actually recognize those licenses? But, as of now, there has been no state law legalizing it like in other states. Jefferson County said they would issue the licenses, other counties around the state have said they would not. Its a bit ambiguous right now.
Judges like to use 14th amendment to do exactly what they just did when it comes to civil rights. Like you said, its murky. Fundamentally, how is marriage life, liberty, or property? Arguably, how is "Marriage" a right? The federal constitution makes no claims about marriage being a right which means whatever definition about marriage is a right is left up to the states. Falling back to the 14th amendment is rather thin. What if a State decides not to grant marriage period then? They'd be satisfying the 14th amendment. The only thing compelling states to issue marriage licenses are the people living within those states. So if the latter is the case, then the people living in those states should be defining what marriage is or isn't.

The other solution to this problem is to make marriage a federal right falling under the constitution through the amendment process. In the current socio-political climate, I think such an amendment for the federal government to issue marriage licenses and define who qualifies for those licenses (including gay marriage) would pass. This also means that valid marriages in some states that would be invalid in other states would go away. The rights associated with marriage would be valid across the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 03:55 PM
 
690 posts, read 916,059 times
Reputation: 608
Quote:
Originally Posted by catfishin2000 View Post
I will join in with my one post in this thread: I believe in States rights. This should be an Alabama issue, put to the voters of Alabama. Period. The US constitution is specific on what the fed Gov should be involved with and this issue aint one of them.

Let Alabama speak for Alabama and let the other states do the same.
LIKE!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 04:01 PM
 
Location: Atlanta
5,618 posts, read 5,888,982 times
Reputation: 4875
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoleFanHSV View Post
Judges like to use 14th amendment to do exactly what they just did when it comes to civil rights. Like you said, its murky. Fundamentally, how is marriage life, liberty, or property? Arguably, how is "Marriage" a right? The federal constitution makes no claims about marriage being a right which means whatever definition about marriage is a right is left up to the states. Falling back to the 14th amendment is rather thin. What if a State decides not to grant marriage period then? They'd be satisfying the 14th amendment. The only thing compelling states to issue marriage licenses are the people living within those states. So if the latter is the case, then the people living in those states should be defining what marriage is or isn't.

The other solution to this problem is to make marriage a federal right falling under the constitution through the amendment process. In the current socio-political climate, I think such an amendment for the federal government to issue marriage licenses and define who qualifies for those licenses (including gay marriage) would pass. This also means that valid marriages in some states that would be invalid in other states would go away. The rights associated with marriage would be valid across the country.
Check out the 9th amendment. Basically, just because a right isn't mentioned, doesn't mean that said right does not exist. It's been used to argue (and uphold) the idea that marriage is a basic right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 06:42 PM
 
458 posts, read 613,475 times
Reputation: 472
In 40 years people are going to look back at us with the same ridicule we look back at the segregationists who championed bans on interracial marriage.

Last edited by FatTails; 01-26-2015 at 07:00 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-26-2015, 07:32 PM
 
944 posts, read 1,177,485 times
Reputation: 661
Quote:
Originally Posted by nerdtron View Post
In 40 years people are going to look back at us with the same ridicule we look back at the segregationists who championed bans on interracial marriage.
Amen!

Set aside all the legal and moral/religious/personal opinions, and try looking at it from a human rights standpoint: the right to make medical decisions for your partner that you've been with for 20++ years, the right to adopt a child (the US still have millions of kids in foster care and people ain't exactly beating down the doors to adopt them), the right to call your partner "your partner"...the right to pay & file married taxes (I think they said the state of AL will earn $200++ million?), the right to be recognized as legal next of kin...the right to inherit...these are rights we, the "straight folks", take for granted, the LGBT community does not have those rights - I have some very close friends who have been together for 30 years, they finally married (in MD) last year and they now have those rights...HOW many married, straight couples stay together that long, through thick and thin, sickness and health? They got married at home, by a JOP, pretty much the same as hubby & I - so to me they are "as married" as we are - not in "holy matrimony", but in the eyes of the law. One could argue from a religious standpoint that hubby and I are not "properly" married either, since it is, a civil/legal union.

What amazes me is that people cherry-pick what's written in the bible AND the constitution - one person's interpretation of said documents seems to be completely different from the next...I'll finish by quoting my newly married friend: "now we're legal to be equally as miserable and stuck as every other married couple"
As an add-on: apparently because I believe in equal rights for all, I am going to hell...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top