New Amendment on Same-Sex Marriage: Constitutional or Not?

         

            Dated all the way back to the 1700s, same-sex marriage has been a major controversy in society. In recent news, President Barack Obama made a public statement saying that he supported gay marriage. Is this his true belief? This quote from CNN states, “I had hesitated on gay marriage, in part, because I thought civil unions would be sufficient, I was sensitive to the fact that — for a lot of people — that the word marriage is something that provokes very powerful traditions and religious beliefs.” Based on his previous opinions, what made him become such a strong advocate for equal marriage rights? It could have been the actions of North Carolina and their extreme efforts to permanently ban gay marriage. They created an amendment that prohibits same-sex marriage even though there was already a state law restricting it.

            On the contrary, the beliefs of Mitt Romney lead him to strongly support the new amendment that North Carolina has created. Stated in the Huffington Post, Romney believes that marriage should be between only one man and one woman. He relates this back to his religious beliefs by saying, “There is no greater force for good in the nation than Christian conscience in action.” Obama doesn’t necessarily disagree with this statement but when he thinks of including his religious ideals in his decisions as President he takes into account the “values like loving our neighbors, being our brother’s and sister’s keeper and dignity for all,” stated by Obama’s religious outreach spokesman Reverend Derrick Harkins.

            I believe that same-sex couples should have the choice of marriage because as stated in amendment one of the United States Constitution, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble.” When North Carolina passed this amendment, it clearly demotes the equality of the men and women who have a partner of the same sex. In this changing society, gays should have the right to be able to live the same lives as any other American.

Activists Pathways to Action in North Carolina

         The judgment of a type of person born into the sexual orientation that they have been is not a value that should be rooted in society today. The view of seeing marriage as a picture-perfect union for an ideal lively hood of all Americans is irrational. Nothing, including moral disapproval and religion validate denying citizens of basic rights and freedoms. Same-sex marriage must be legalized in order to attain equality and promote unity in America while stimulating the economy. Being unfair to any group of Americans endangers the justice of all Americans; if a certain group can be so effortlessly condemned to the loss of a simple right nothing prevents it from happening to another group of Americans fighting for a different cause.

         However, on May 8^th, 2012, Amendment One in North Carolina was passed. This Amendment to the Constitution of North Carolina prohibits gay marriage, it makes “marriage between one man and one woman is the only domestic legal union that shall be valid or recognized in this state” the law. When voting took place, the voter turn-out was much greater than expected and ended up resulting in Amendment One passing by about 20%. After the victory, conservative North Carolinians celebrated by eating delicious multi-tiered wedding cakes with figurines of a male and female bride and groom to further celebrate their “pro-marriage” point of view. This Amendment however takes away from other men and women who are not homosexual. Benefits that are given to married families will not be given to families who are in domestic partnerships or even families with a single parent. This endangers the welfare of many men, women, and children in the state of North Carolina.

         In the beginning of the debate on Amendment One, the civil-rights groups in North Carolina began using pathways of action to help promote their cause. Using the “Grassroots Mobilization” Pathway, the citizens rallied up and promoted gay marriage and civil rights for all types of partnerships. Using the “Cultural Change” Pathway, activists called households to better inform them of the effects of Amendment One. The other ways the activists helped the cause was by sending over 5,000 post cards to legislators to raise awareness of the danger of Amendment One. Concerts were held to raise awareness the night before voting all around North Carolina and especially near Chapel Hill and other college cities to help raise awareness within the younger community. Finally, using twitter, The Coalition to Protect NC Families had created a twitter to keep voters up to date on the Amendment and also to be an input for donations.

         After reading about all of the activities that had taken place to help stop Amendment One from passing, I noticed that they were all the pathways of actions we have learned about. The topic we learned about in class was connected to an issue happening in the United States, and my Government class education helped me fully see all of the great ways people can work together to try and make a difference in the country.

“Which side should I support?”

Should I support gay marriage or oppose it?  This is a question that President Obama has had to ask himself recently in the 2012 Presidential election.  President Obama has been on the fence for the past few weeks until recently claiming he supports gay marriage, but his behavior makes me question whether his personal beliefs made the decision or whether his party’s beliefs did.  Vice President Joe Biden had been known for supporting gay marriage while his president was somewhat neutral about the subject.  The question that keeps re-occurring to me is; why did President Obama suddenly choose a side and how did he make his decision in such a short period of time?

Our study of parties and political outlooks this unit has helped me to answer this question.  I choose to be independent meaning I don’t affiliate with either party.  Like President Obama, I have not taken a side to the gay marriage battle and I simply don’t care to because it isn’t as important to me and my life as other issues that are being debated.  I think President Obama may share the same beliefs as I do, but running for re-election requires him to take a side.  His choice to support gay marriage has been argued to have been influenced by Vice President Biden, the homosexual liberal community, etc., but I believe it was his party’s values that chose his mind for him.  Learning about judicial philosophies in Government this past week has helped me understand how presidents choose sides on an issue they seem to be indifferent about.  This past week, I had to read, compare, and contrast the two main competing judicial philosophies: flexible interpretation and original intent.  Flexible interpretation means the members of the judicial system honor the Constitution in a more flexible way while original intent is when the member honor the Constitution word-for-word.  Although his decision had no relevance to the judicial system, the democratic party has an almost entirely liberal outlook which means flexible interpretation is used more often.  Conservatives argue a man marring a man or a woman marring a woman are unconstitutional, but the democrats use flexible interpretation to make what they feel is the correct choice is today’s context and community.

President Barack Obama may have chosen the way he did for publicity or for votes, but I believe he chose the way he did to honor his party’s beliefs rather than his own.  I was able to come to this conclusion from our studies of the judicial branch and how they make their decisions according to their interpretation of constitution.  President Obama is using his party’s method of interpretation to choose what would attract more democrats and liberals to his beliefs gaining him more support.  Also by following his party’s values, he gains support from the large homosexual community in America.  Because of our judicial unit, I see why President Obama has used the liberal judicial form of making choices to make his own choices in the 2012 Presidential Election.

Has the Time for Same-Sex Marriage Come?

On May 9^th, 2012 Obama finally stated his stance on same-sex marriage. In his interview with ABC News that morning he gave his affirmation on same-sex marriage. The White House Blog tells you how this was no easy decision for president, and it took him quite some time to come up with his position in this debate between same-sex marriage. His decision started off with talking to the First Lady, Michelle Obama, about what his and hers stance should be on this issue. From there it led to him talking to many people that were in same-sex relationships that were serving in office or fighting over seas because of Obama’s earlier policy that was passed- Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. After that he went onto talking to his two daughters, Sasha and Malia, who happen to have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. His two daughters were unaware of the fact that their friends’ parents are being treated differently because they are in same-sex relationships. The president, after much contemplation, decided his stance and ended with “treat others the way you would want to be treated”. A statement we learned in kindergarten right?

Personally, I feel as if that same-sex marriage is not a big deal. Don’t people always say, “Love is blind”? If we believe in that statement then why are we giving the same-sex couples such a hard time? I see no difference in a woman and woman getting married, a man and man getting married, or a man and a woman getting married. Love knows no gender, it just happens and no one can control whom he or she love. And, honestly, we’re in a generation where it’s acceptable to get divorced after 72 days, but a same-sex couple that has been partners for 30+ years has no rights to marriage. How does that even remotely seem okay to people?

In the constitution the 14^th Amendment section 1 states, “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States… nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws”. Marriage is a privilege in the United States and the 14^th amendment clearly states that no state shall make or enforce laws that take away men and women’s privileges. Not letting same-sex couples could be considered unconstitutional, but then people bring “religion” into it. America is a country that can’t force any religion upon you, and since we have religious freedom they shouldn’t be allowed to use “faith” and “religion” to control whether or not they can get married or not.

This issue may continue on for the next few years, or the next few decades. Either way, this is an issue that needs to be targeted and an issue that needs to be given more thought. Imagine waking up one day and knowing that you don’t have the rights to get married.