I know that this is practically “old news,” but I needed the time to digest it and think about what took place at the Supreme Court last week.Reading a transcript of the Proposition 8 case being heard by the Supreme Court, I was insulted by the attitude of Judge Scalia, the most arrogant and in my view, sarcastic of all justices.
What offended me the most was when he asked Mr. Olson when did excluding homosexuals from marriage became unconstitutional.
“You’ve led me right into a question I was going to ask. The California Supreme Court decides what the law is. That's what we decide, right? We don't prescribe law for the future. We decide what the law is. I'm curious, when did it become unconstitutional to exclude homosexual couples from marriage? 1791? 1868, when the 14th Amendment was adopted? Sometimes — some time after Baker, where we said it didn't even raise a substantial Federal question? When did the law become this?” - Justice Scalia
What arrogance! “There's no specific date in time. This is an evolutionary cycle.” - was Mr. Olson’s response. I was not satisfied with Mr. Olson’s answer. My answer would have been that it is and it has always been unconstitutional, because the Constitution of the United States clearly states that Privileges should be equal for all citizens in all the States, not just a group of citizens. Article. IV, Section 2 clearly states that all Citizens should be entitled to all the Privileges of the other States.
The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
That applies to Privileges and Punishments as well… marriage is a privilege and for some is a punishment. Seriously now, marriage and healthcare are privileges, privileges the Republicans and Teabaggers claim to be a State matter. I don’t think so and I am amazed that no one has ever mentioned this to debunk these bogus claims.
If Article IV isn’t enough, Amendment IX should deem the discrimination against homosexuals as unconstitutional: “The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Again, the Founding Fathers made sure not to differentiate – citizens and people are asexual terms that apply equally to every human being, and that just because a right wasn't written in the Constitution it didn't mean that if people thought it was a right not to be accepted, over 50% of the citizens of this nation approve gay marriage.
If you are not satisfied with the above, then I would have mentioned Amendment XIV, Section 1: “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.”
None of the Articles or the Amendments defines marriage, not one. None of the Articles or Amendments segregates a group of people by their sexual preference or their religion, not ever. The original Constitution made sure to segregate natives, women and blacks, which thankfully was corrected by future amendments but nowhere, from the original signed back in September 17, 1787 to the present there is mention of homosexuals having different rights to those granted to heterosexuals, much less if they can or cannot get married.
I don't think that I have to remind everyone that homosexuality is not something new. Homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time; it exists even in other species. If the Founding Fathers were against homosexuality they would have made sure to include some type of rejection, separation or mention just like they did with women, natives and blacks… but they didn’t.
So my answer would have been that it was unconstitutional since September 18th, 1787. The fact that not until today the gay community had the courage to contest it doesn’t mean it was constitutional. Just like it was unconstitutional to exclude women and blacks since the beginning and that was changed when there was someone with the courage to demand a change. Just like inter-racial marriage was unconstitutional until Mr. and Mrs. Loving took their case to the Supreme Court in 1967. The country didn’t collapsed with those changes – which by the way, applied to the whole land and not just a State – actually, the country became a better place simply because harmony and progress can only be attained when everyone, EVERYONE, can enjoy the same privileges, after all no matter who you go to bed with, who you love… we are all the same, we are all humans and a society cannot advance when broken and where one group suffers just to satisfy another group – no matter how big or small the objecting group is.
Gay marriage will not affect one iota the marriage of heterosexuals, it will not make their marriage less valid nor will it make them unhappy. However, the actions and objections of those against gay marriage are sentencing a group of citizens, many of whom are their families, friends, neighbors or co-workers to be a lesser kind of citizens just because they do not agree with whom they love and want share their lives with. If that is not selfishness and senseless discrimination then nothing is!
With so much hate around us, isn't it time we rejoice in people loving each other and let everyone be equal?
None of the Articles or the Amendments defines marriage, not one. None of the Articles or Amendments segregates a group of people by their sexual preference or their religion, not ever. The original Constitution made sure to segregate natives, women and blacks, which thankfully was corrected by future amendments but nowhere, from the original signed back in September 17, 1787 to the present there is mention of homosexuals having different rights to those granted to heterosexuals, much less if they can or cannot get married.
I don't think that I have to remind everyone that homosexuality is not something new. Homosexuality has existed since the beginning of time; it exists even in other species. If the Founding Fathers were against homosexuality they would have made sure to include some type of rejection, separation or mention just like they did with women, natives and blacks… but they didn’t.
So my answer would have been that it was unconstitutional since September 18th, 1787. The fact that not until today the gay community had the courage to contest it doesn’t mean it was constitutional. Just like it was unconstitutional to exclude women and blacks since the beginning and that was changed when there was someone with the courage to demand a change. Just like inter-racial marriage was unconstitutional until Mr. and Mrs. Loving took their case to the Supreme Court in 1967. The country didn’t collapsed with those changes – which by the way, applied to the whole land and not just a State – actually, the country became a better place simply because harmony and progress can only be attained when everyone, EVERYONE, can enjoy the same privileges, after all no matter who you go to bed with, who you love… we are all the same, we are all humans and a society cannot advance when broken and where one group suffers just to satisfy another group – no matter how big or small the objecting group is.
Gay marriage will not affect one iota the marriage of heterosexuals, it will not make their marriage less valid nor will it make them unhappy. However, the actions and objections of those against gay marriage are sentencing a group of citizens, many of whom are their families, friends, neighbors or co-workers to be a lesser kind of citizens just because they do not agree with whom they love and want share their lives with. If that is not selfishness and senseless discrimination then nothing is!
With so much hate around us, isn't it time we rejoice in people loving each other and let everyone be equal?
No comments:
Post a Comment