Monday, November 3, 2014

States should decide same-sex marriage issue

Madana Kloss 4th

In a recent interview, Jimmy Carter shared his opinion on giving the decision of the legalization of same-sex marriages to state governments. Carter discussed how he believes that even if a state rules that it is legal, they cannot force a church to marry same-sex couples. I think that the benefit of having states decide on this issue is that those that want legalization of same-sex marriages can achieve it, while still allowing those that oppose it to have the ability to prohibit it. However, this poses the problem of same-sex couples not having their marriage legally recognized in certain states and being denied benefits, or having to live in states where their marriage is allowed. Similarly in history, states decided whether or not slavery was allowed, which resulted in tensions between states with conflicting viewpoints, as well as problems when slave owners traveled with slaves to free states.


Personally, I believe that everybody should have the right to marry whomever they want. Extending the power of decision to the states makes it possible for gay marriage to be outlawed in certain states. I think this is outrageous. Loving someone and marrying him/her is a basic human right. I know many are against, gay marriage but the law doesn't say they need to be homosexual. It's true that the government can't force a church to marry same-sex couples, which is why I believe that those couples should have the legal ability to get married in a courthouse in their state of residence.


http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/should-same-sex-marriage-be-left-to-the-states





4 comments:

  1. It states in the constitution that the states have the power to make laws regarding marriage. Therefore, I believe it should be up to the states.

    ReplyDelete
  2. It should be up to the states but my personal opinion is to let whoever marry the one they love, whether it be same sex or opposite.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It is true that they can't make a church hold a same sex marrige, because that would be imposing on the owner of the curch's rights. I do however like your analysis. This (while even though it is much less in severity in that we're not owning people and taking away all of their rights) is very compariable. That being said, even though I agree with your views on same sex marriage, I sadly don't think any higher athourity can just make other states change their laws

    Trevor Haueisen 6th

    ReplyDelete
  4. This is an excellent story, but how can you relate it to what we recently talked about in class... the Principals of the Constitution? States rights vs Federal authority? The Bill of Rights?

    ReplyDelete