The definition was 'understood' to be between a man and women. They failed to see the need for it to be defined. Basically, everybody knew what they were talking about.
That's weak, CS.
DOMA was backlash.
After fighting for about 10 years, the movement to open civil marriage to same-sex couples achieved its first temporary success in 1993 with the decision of the Hawaii Supreme Court that the restriction of marriage to opposite-sex couples would be unconstitutional.
It was becoming patently obvious a same sex marriage law was bound to pass in some state, some time soon.
And the bigots knew the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution was going to cause some problems. That clause says, in effect, that states must give effect to each other's public acts, records, and judicial proceedings. And among such acts would be the act of performing a marriage.
DOMA passed in 1996.
8 weeks before the presidential election.
The anti-gay marriage state laws soon followed. The first was passed in 1998. In a red state. Followed by 15 states in 2004. 14 of which were red states. Followed by 2 in 2005. Both red states. Followed by 7 in 2006. 6 of which were red states.
Of these, all but 4 were passed within 2 weeks of an election day.
Starting to get the picture, CS?
No? OK.
wiki writes:
Beginning in 2003, members of Congress have annually introduced a "court-stripping" provision that would prevent all federal courts from hearing claims challenging the constitutionality of DOMA.
Why do you suppose that is, CS? Why would anti gay marriage legislators need to prevent the issue from being heard in a federal court?
I'll tell you why, CS. Because DOMA has the effect of modifying the U.S. Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause, something that Congress does not have the power to do without following the proper procedures for constitutional amendment.
Virtually all constitutional scholars agree that the U.S. Supreme Court -- especially the conservative justices who like to be consistent in constitutional interpretations -- would rule that full faith and credit takes precedent.
Which is why Republicans have introduced a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution each year since DOMA passed.
Starting to get the picture, CS?
No? OK. In the past, 3 constitutional amendments were proposed that would have enshrined a ban on interracial marriage in the constitution.
Starting to get the picture, CS?
No? OK. To quote the Alaskan judge who ruled in 1998 that same sex marriage is allowed under the Alaska State Constitution.
"The right to choose one’s life partner is constitutionally fundamental."
"Government intrusion into the choice of a life partner encroaches on the intimate personal decisions of the individual," the judge wrote. "The relevant question is not whether same-sex marriage is so rooted in our traditions . . . , but whether the freedom to choose one’s own life partner is so rooted in our traditions."
Quote:
Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church | Cedar Lane Unitarian Universalist Church
Starting to get the picture, CS?
No? OK. In 1978, the U.S. Supreme Court in Zablocki v. Redhail declared that marriage is “of fundamental importance to all individuals,” “one of the basic civil rights of man”, and “the most important relation in life”. It declared “the right to marry is part of the fundamental right to privacy” in the U.S. Constitution.
Starting to get the picture, CS?
No? OK. Guess why anti sodomy laws were ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
The fundamental right to privacy.
"The petitioners are entitled to respect for their private lives," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the court's majority. "The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime."
Quote:
Error
Starting to get the picture, CS?
No? OK. What are some other things that were "understood" about marriage for the most of history of this nation?
No miscegenation.
No divorce.
No contraception.
No legal rights (property, child custody, contractual, control of earnings, etc.) for women.
No criminal or civil liability for women.
No such thing as marital rape. Until 1978!
Age of consent: 10 years old.
Marriage as a cultural norm, as a familial relationship, and as a legal status has done nothing
but change.
Civil unions just don't cut it.
A 2004 study by the Congressional Budget Office found 1,138 federal statutes are related to marriage benefits.
To name a few:
Inheritance rights
Insurance
Taxes
Child custody
Child support
Alimony
Domestic violence
Adoption
Property inheritance
Family leave
Suing for wrongful death (and any other tort or law related to spousal relationships)
Hospital visitation
Health care decision-making
Durable power of attorney
Marriage is a civil RIGHT that is afforded ALL our citizens. The right to pursue happiness, remember?
™ Version 4.2
