Preview

Pa250 Unit 1

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
783 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Pa250 Unit 1
One of the basic rights we hold sacred in this country is the freedom to marry whomever we choose. While that seems like a given in the US, because we don’t have the strict class hierarchy of Europe, or the arranged unions found in certain Eastern and African cultures that define who marries whom. We have had, and still do for that matter, rigid restrictions on marriage, when they seem counter-intuitive to social mores. When social feelings begin to shift towards a more progressive outlook, challenges to the status quo are bound to occur, especially when the emotionally charged aspect of marriage is involved. Two perfect examples are the cases of Loving v. Virginia 388 US 1, 87 S Ct1817(1967), and Goodridge v. Department of Public Health 440 Mass 309, 798 NE 2d 941(Mass.2003).
Loving v. Virginia (388 US 1, 1967) was a landmark case, dealing with inter-racial marriage, which went all the way to the US Supreme Court. The plaintiffs, Mildred and Richard Loving, an inter-racial couple, who were residents of Virginia, where at the time it was illegal for people of different races to be married. They went to Washington D.C. in June of 1958 to get married, and returned back to live a married couple in Virginia. Upon their return to Caroline County, Virginia they were charged with violating the law. The couple was charged when police invaded their home in the middle of the night, hoping to witness the Loving’s involved in a sexual act which was also a crime at the time in Virginia. When Mrs. Loving showed the police the marriage certificate, the police charged the couple with violating Virginia § 20-50 which, “prohibited interracial couples from being married out of state and then returning to Virginia.” As well as, Virginia § 20-59 that made “miscegenation” a felony. Black’s Law defines miscegenation as, “A marriage between persons of different races, formally considered illegal in some jurisdictions. In 1967, the US Supreme Court held that laws banning



References: Loving v Virginia 388 US 1, 87 S Ct 1817(1967) 18 L. Ed. 2d 1010 US Lexis 1082 Goodridge v Department of Public Health 440 Mass. 309, 798 NE 2d 941 (Mass. 2003)

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    Pt2520 Unit 6 Lab 1

    • 292 Words
    • 2 Pages

    24. What is the difference between the logical design and the physical design of a database?…

    • 292 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    pt2520 unit 8

    • 287 Words
    • 1 Page

    When a client connects to the MySQL server, the server uses the username provided by the client and the client host to select the appropriate account row from the mysql.user table. It then uses this row to authenticate the client. Before MySQL 5.5.7, the server authenticates the password provided by the client against the Password column of the account row. As of MySQL 5.5.7, the server authenticates clients using plugins. Selection of the proper account row from the mysql.user table is based on the user name and client host, as before, but the server authenticates the client credentials as follows: The server determines from the account row which authentication plugin applies for the client. If the account row specifies no plugin name, the server uses native authentication; that is, authentication against the password stored in the Password column of the account row. This is the same authentication method provided by MySQL servers older than 5.5.7, before pluggable authentication was implemented, but now is implemented using two plugins that are built in and cannot be disabled. If the account row specifies a plugin, the server invokes it to authenticate the user. If the server cannot find the plugin, an error occurs. The plugin returns a status to the server indicating whether the user is permitted to connect.…

    • 287 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    The Lovings, were accused of violating the state’s “Racial Integrity Act of 1924, an anti-miscegenation statute.…

    • 109 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Mildred Jeter, an African-American woman, and Richard Loving, a white man, went to Washington, D.C, to get married and avoid Virginia’s interracial marriage ban. When they returned to Virginia not long after, the Lovings were arrested under the charges of violating Virginia’s interracial marriage ban.…

    • 189 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Pt2520 Unit 6

    • 1447 Words
    • 6 Pages

    What is data redundancy, and which characteristics of the file system can lead to it?…

    • 1447 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Loving v Virginia a married couple from Washington D.C. moved to Virginia where they were then subject to Virginia’s anti-miscegenation statute. Anti-miscegenation laws prohibit the marrying of different races with another. In Virginia, this statute prohibited the marriage between whites and any other race. Richard Loving, a white man, and Mildred Jeter, a black woman, were married in Washington D.C. They then moved to the state of Virginia where they faced criminal charges. Both of them pled guilty and were sentenced to one year imprisonment but the sentence would be waved for 25 years if they moved out of state and didn’t return.…

    • 600 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    As the case of Garden State Equality vs. Dow unravels into the Supreme Court hearings, there will be an indefinite variety of opinions and disputes of minds. There is room for controversy and disputes will arise. There are miss-interpretations and quotes that government officials and citizens against civil union rights have expressed and demonstrated about same-sex couples and their right to marry. This is an example of an interpretation given to describe differences in marital relationships by one of the Opinions of the Justices to the Senate, 440 Mass. at 1207, it states, “The dissimilitude between the terms “civil marriage” and “civil union” is not innocuous; it is a considered choice of…

    • 575 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Case 1: Mahe Vs. Alberta

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Summary: Federal appeals court judges questioned lawyers on both sides of Virginia’s potentially landmark fay marriage case. Hundreds of protestors gathered outside the courthouse holding signs and shouting slogans. The three-judge panel questioned the lawyers throughout the case that challenged the state’s same-sex marriage prohibition. A decision is expected in a few weeks on an issue both sides believe will ultimately lead to the decision of the Supreme Court U.S. Impact: This potentially landmark decision will definitely influence the social environment of Virginia.…

    • 1127 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Plaintiffs in Loving v. Virginia were Richard and Mildred Loving, who were represented by the ACLU in the Supreme Court. The Plaintiff argued the prohibition of interracial marriage was unconstitutional and anti-miscegenation laws violated the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment explains, “No State shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of the law.” As declared by the Constitution and Maynard v. Hill case, marriage is a civil right for citizens of the United States and the decision of whether one decides to marry a colored person or not cannot be infringed by any state. Denying anyone their given right to marry without due process of the…

    • 274 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    United States is a case that was brought before SCOTUS on November 13, 1878. Reynolds v. United States. The case was about anti-bigamy laws and that the law violates a person's 1st amendment right of religious freedom. Reynolds v. United States. SCOTUS decided unanimous that no, it does not since the practice of bigamy is a criminal offence, and the 1st amendment doesn't protect against criminal offences (Reynolds v. United States). The Utah Legislation website offers what the Bigamy law in Utah is…

    • 629 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Loving Vs Virginia

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages

    Virginia: The Case Over Interracial Marriage”). In the state of Virginia, the couple was sent to prison because they violated the miscegenation laws. One late night in their Virginia home, police broke into their house. Later, they were brought to prison.The authorities educated them about the laws of Virginia. The statement shows what happened to the Lovings. “At the October Term, 1958, of the Circuit Court of Caroline County, a grand jury issued an indictment charging the Lovings with violating Virginia's ban on interracial marriages” (“Loving v. Virginia LII”). Due to the fact they were charged guilty, the Lovings made the decision to take their case to court. On April 10, 1967, the angry couple explained that the law was a violation of their privacy and well-being. The following shows the Loving’s reason to get help. “These Lovings claimed that the state law violated their 14th Amendment rights to pursuit life, liberty and happiness” (“Loving v Virginia” laws.com). In this ruling,the judge was Leon. M Bazile. Immediately, he made his final decision about the conflict. He believed that people of different ethnicities were not supposed to love each other. Leon Bazile quoted, "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents ... The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races…

    • 1779 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Civil Rights

    • 1045 Words
    • 5 Pages

    403 U.S. 217; 91 S. Ct. 1940; 29 L. Ed. 2d 438; 1971 U.S. LEXIS 27…

    • 1045 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    democracy in the quest for marriage equality. Columbia Journal of Gender and Law , 19…

    • 2378 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Gay Marriage Argument

    • 125 Words
    • 1 Page

    ay marriage is a contentious issue in the US today. Currently, only fifteen states have legalized gay marriage, and even then it has been a long and tough fight to get to this point. In California, Proposition 8 won by a majority in 2008 when same sex marriage proponents sought to prevent gay couples from accessing marriage licences. On June 2013, gay couples in California could once again acquire marriage licences after Proposition 8 was deemed unconstitutional (Mears para. 2). This trend has been observed in most of the fifteen states where the constitutional provisions of equality and civil rights have been used to defend gay marriage. The principles that guide the legalization of gay marriage are ingrained in the very heart of the…

    • 125 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    “They are preserving the sanctity of marriage, so that two gay men who've been together for twenty-five years can't get married, but a guy can still get drunk in Vegas and marry a hooker at the Elvis chapel! The sanctity of marriage is saved!” Lea DeLaria states her views on gay marriage. Some although, view this topic very differently, it is seen as a dirty abomination to many that heterosexual marriage is being corrupted by the possibility of homosexual marriage. The year is 2010, yet America has seemed to take a step back in giving everyone and anyone equal rights in today’s society, leading back when America thought it was not a good idea to give African Americans their rights. Is that situation so different from today’s argument of giving homosexuals their rights? Although heterosexual marriages are more acceptable in America today, homosexual relationships as well as marriages need to be respected, not restrained so homosexuals can live freely as they please.…

    • 888 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays

Related Topics