14th Amendment Pros And Cons
Avigdor Schultz
Contemporary issues in Law
Professor. Kurland
12/15/15
PRO GAY RIGHTS FINAL The 14th amendment, passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868, under the presidency of Andrew Johnson. The fourteenth Amendment is one of the reconstruction Amendments, it addresses citizenship rights, and the equal protection of the laws. Gay rights and same sex marriage is protected by the Due Process Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment.
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 …show more content…
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. - 14 amendment, (Sec.1) As Americans, we were founded by freedom, we fought for freedom, and we got freedom. We live and govern ourselves by the constitution, which protects us, and our rights to live a free life. The first ten amendments make up the bill of rights, its talks about all types of rights that we are given, but nowhere does it talk about taking away rights. So who are we, a country that was founded on returning rights to people, who are we to deny other people's rights?! Tell me where in the constitution does it state that you have a right to deny someone else's right? Gay rights has always been a touchy topic, and a lot of people have different views on how "they" should live, and what "their" rights should be. But why are "we" telling "them" what their rights as humans, and citizens can be? If you were to ask people on the street today what their view on gays should be, we could all agree that almost everyone would say yes, gays deserve equality when it comes to having a job, a house, benefits, and government protection. However, when it comes to marriage that's another ball game. The same people who would tell you on the street that gays should have equal rights, are the same people who all of the sudden when it comes to marriage have a change of heart. What is it about marriage that suddenly changes people's opinions, and do different people's opinions give them the right to deny other peoples rights? Marriage is no small matter, in every country, in every culture, in every place around the world people are allowed to get married it's a normal function of life, so why should people who have same gender attraction suddenly be excluded from the rest of the world, and from the rest of life? The Supreme Court case of Obergefell v. Hodges ( 576 U.S.__2015) is a huge turning point in the supreme court hearings within the past year. They held a decision of five to four that the right to marry is protected by the 14th amendment under the Due Process Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause. In another supreme court case of Richard John Baker v. Gerald R. Nelson, (291 Minn. 310, 191 N.W.2d 185). June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Baker in Obergefell v. Hodges legalizing gay marriage all over the country. To cite an even earlier case again on "June 26, two years earlier in 2013, the Supreme Court found the third Section of DOMA (codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7) to be unconstitutional, as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment" Again, and again, we start to see the supreme court hearings to find in favor of the right to have a same gender marriage, the earlier cases held it to be unconstitutional, and now they have been overruled. Gay people should not be treated any differently than any other person.
You can't deny somebody the right to get married without touching discrimination. " On July 25, 2014 Miami-Dade County Circuit Court Judge Sarah Zabel ruled Florida's gay marriage ban unconstitutional and stated that the ban serves only to hurt, to discriminate, to deprive same-sex couples and their families of equal dignity, to label and treat them as second-class citizens, and to deem them unworthy of participation in one of the fundamental institutions of our society."(ProCon.org) Opposing gay marriage is just flat out wrong, you can't just treat some citizen of the country one way and favor the others, that is 100% discrimination, and unconstitutional. Some people might argue and say that it's strictly a religious matter, however, that's not true, marriage is also a secular matter. Secondly telling gay people they can't get married isn't a religious freedom its abuse. Because if you were to base your argument off of the fact that gay people can't get married because of your religion, that's flat our crazy, one because not everyone in this country, or the world is of the same religion, and secondly, I can just go an make a religion were gay people are allowed to get married, and that ok because that what we believe in. Other people maybe argue that it says in the bible that gays getting married is an abomination, however, this country was founded on the fact that there is separation of church and state, which make that argument invalid as
well. There are over 1,100 rights and benefits that are available to married couples , and same gender couples are denied these just for the fact that they naturally have a different affinity. Imagine yourself in those peoples shoes, one of those major benefits is hospital visitations. Can you imagine for one second that there is someone who you love, who got sick, or was in an accident, and you can't visit them because even though you love them, you're not legally considered part of the family. In another major case United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. ___(2013. 133S.Ct 2675; 186 LEd.2d 808) Edith Windsor got married to her partner Thea legally in Canada, then they moved to New York, where the state recognized their marriage. One year later Thea died leaving her estate to Edith, Edith wanted to claim tax exemption due to the fact that she inherited the property through survivorship. However, she was not allowed to do so because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in Section 3 of (codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7) barred it. Doma states that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman, which means even though your state can recognize your same sex marriage, according to DOMA on a federal level, they will not recognize your marriage, which hold you back from receiving major federal benefits. In our case Edith was unable to obtain the estate tax exemption and was ordered by the I.R.S. to pay over 350,000$ just because she loved someone of the same gender. They didn't recognize same sex marriages as a valid marriage. Can you imagine having to pay over a quarter of a million dollars to the government just because you like someone from the same gender, that's flat out discrimination, and unconstitutional. As was proven later by this defining case in gay rights and U.S. history, by declaring DOMA unconstitutional. Another Famous argument is that same sex marriage isn't natural and you can't pro-create through same gender marriage, that argument can easily be invalidated, because pro creation isn't a requirement to get married, otherwise people who were infertile, or unable to have children should have to also have a reason to get married. According to the " US Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, a marriage license would be granted to a couple in which the man and woman are both over the age of 55, even though there are not a lot of children coming out of that marriage." ( Hollingsworth .v. Kristen M. Perry). We see from this ruling that having the ability to have children is not a major factor in represent if a marriage is valid or not. Studies have also shown that same sex marriage boosts the economy, New York city mayor, Michael Bloomberg was quoted as saying in July 2012 " that gay marriage had contributed $259 million to the city's economy since the practice became legal there in July 2011." There are still those who say that same sex marriage is not stable and a threat to "The intuition of marriage", but they are wrong, a recent study conducted by the social science quarterly stated " that permitting same sex marriage or civil unions have no adverse affect on marriage, divorce, abortion, or children born out of wedlock." Just the opposite is true, in 2004 the first state to legalize gay marriage was Massachusetts, since then they have had the lowest divorce rate in the United States. Not only that, but the states that did not allow gay marriage where the highest of all in divorce rates.
Contemporary issues in Law
Professor. Kurland
12/15/15
PRO GAY RIGHTS FINAL The 14th amendment, passed by Congress on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868, under the presidency of Andrew Johnson. The fourteenth Amendment is one of the reconstruction Amendments, it addresses citizenship rights, and the equal protection of the laws. Gay rights and same sex marriage is protected by the Due Process Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause of the fourteenth amendment.
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 …show more content…
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. - 14 amendment, (Sec.1) As Americans, we were founded by freedom, we fought for freedom, and we got freedom. We live and govern ourselves by the constitution, which protects us, and our rights to live a free life. The first ten amendments make up the bill of rights, its talks about all types of rights that we are given, but nowhere does it talk about taking away rights. So who are we, a country that was founded on returning rights to people, who are we to deny other people's rights?! Tell me where in the constitution does it state that you have a right to deny someone else's right? Gay rights has always been a touchy topic, and a lot of people have different views on how "they" should live, and what "their" rights should be. But why are "we" telling "them" what their rights as humans, and citizens can be? If you were to ask people on the street today what their view on gays should be, we could all agree that almost everyone would say yes, gays deserve equality when it comes to having a job, a house, benefits, and government protection. However, when it comes to marriage that's another ball game. The same people who would tell you on the street that gays should have equal rights, are the same people who all of the sudden when it comes to marriage have a change of heart. What is it about marriage that suddenly changes people's opinions, and do different people's opinions give them the right to deny other peoples rights? Marriage is no small matter, in every country, in every culture, in every place around the world people are allowed to get married it's a normal function of life, so why should people who have same gender attraction suddenly be excluded from the rest of the world, and from the rest of life? The Supreme Court case of Obergefell v. Hodges ( 576 U.S.__2015) is a huge turning point in the supreme court hearings within the past year. They held a decision of five to four that the right to marry is protected by the 14th amendment under the Due Process Clause, and the Equal Protection Clause. In another supreme court case of Richard John Baker v. Gerald R. Nelson, (291 Minn. 310, 191 N.W.2d 185). June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Baker in Obergefell v. Hodges legalizing gay marriage all over the country. To cite an even earlier case again on "June 26, two years earlier in 2013, the Supreme Court found the third Section of DOMA (codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7) to be unconstitutional, as a deprivation of the liberty of the person protected by the Fifth Amendment" Again, and again, we start to see the supreme court hearings to find in favor of the right to have a same gender marriage, the earlier cases held it to be unconstitutional, and now they have been overruled. Gay people should not be treated any differently than any other person.
You can't deny somebody the right to get married without touching discrimination. " On July 25, 2014 Miami-Dade County Circuit Court Judge Sarah Zabel ruled Florida's gay marriage ban unconstitutional and stated that the ban serves only to hurt, to discriminate, to deprive same-sex couples and their families of equal dignity, to label and treat them as second-class citizens, and to deem them unworthy of participation in one of the fundamental institutions of our society."(ProCon.org) Opposing gay marriage is just flat out wrong, you can't just treat some citizen of the country one way and favor the others, that is 100% discrimination, and unconstitutional. Some people might argue and say that it's strictly a religious matter, however, that's not true, marriage is also a secular matter. Secondly telling gay people they can't get married isn't a religious freedom its abuse. Because if you were to base your argument off of the fact that gay people can't get married because of your religion, that's flat our crazy, one because not everyone in this country, or the world is of the same religion, and secondly, I can just go an make a religion were gay people are allowed to get married, and that ok because that what we believe in. Other people maybe argue that it says in the bible that gays getting married is an abomination, however, this country was founded on the fact that there is separation of church and state, which make that argument invalid as
well. There are over 1,100 rights and benefits that are available to married couples , and same gender couples are denied these just for the fact that they naturally have a different affinity. Imagine yourself in those peoples shoes, one of those major benefits is hospital visitations. Can you imagine for one second that there is someone who you love, who got sick, or was in an accident, and you can't visit them because even though you love them, you're not legally considered part of the family. In another major case United States v. Windsor, 570 U.S. ___(2013. 133S.Ct 2675; 186 LEd.2d 808) Edith Windsor got married to her partner Thea legally in Canada, then they moved to New York, where the state recognized their marriage. One year later Thea died leaving her estate to Edith, Edith wanted to claim tax exemption due to the fact that she inherited the property through survivorship. However, she was not allowed to do so because of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in Section 3 of (codified at 1 U.S.C. § 7) barred it. Doma states that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman, which means even though your state can recognize your same sex marriage, according to DOMA on a federal level, they will not recognize your marriage, which hold you back from receiving major federal benefits. In our case Edith was unable to obtain the estate tax exemption and was ordered by the I.R.S. to pay over 350,000$ just because she loved someone of the same gender. They didn't recognize same sex marriages as a valid marriage. Can you imagine having to pay over a quarter of a million dollars to the government just because you like someone from the same gender, that's flat out discrimination, and unconstitutional. As was proven later by this defining case in gay rights and U.S. history, by declaring DOMA unconstitutional. Another Famous argument is that same sex marriage isn't natural and you can't pro-create through same gender marriage, that argument can easily be invalidated, because pro creation isn't a requirement to get married, otherwise people who were infertile, or unable to have children should have to also have a reason to get married. According to the " US Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan, a marriage license would be granted to a couple in which the man and woman are both over the age of 55, even though there are not a lot of children coming out of that marriage." ( Hollingsworth .v. Kristen M. Perry). We see from this ruling that having the ability to have children is not a major factor in represent if a marriage is valid or not. Studies have also shown that same sex marriage boosts the economy, New York city mayor, Michael Bloomberg was quoted as saying in July 2012 " that gay marriage had contributed $259 million to the city's economy since the practice became legal there in July 2011." There are still those who say that same sex marriage is not stable and a threat to "The intuition of marriage", but they are wrong, a recent study conducted by the social science quarterly stated " that permitting same sex marriage or civil unions have no adverse affect on marriage, divorce, abortion, or children born out of wedlock." Just the opposite is true, in 2004 the first state to legalize gay marriage was Massachusetts, since then they have had the lowest divorce rate in the United States. Not only that, but the states that did not allow gay marriage where the highest of all in divorce rates.