One of the more recent focuses of attention in the political news realm is the "gay marriage" debate. The question that everyone seems to be asking is: "Is gay marriage constitutional?" I would like to take this moment to ask a different question. Is traditional marriage a constitutional right? The simple answer is no. No where in the constitution does it ever say that we have a right to be married. I think that we must first understand this very simple point. Marriage is not a constitutional right.
However, it is a civil right--rights belonging to a person by reason of citizenship--as defined by the 14th amendment:
"Amendment XIV - Section I: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. 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."
-The Constitution of the United States of America
We, as Americans, have a right to life, liberty, and property. These things cannot be taken away from a citizen of the United States of America without due process of law. (Which, by the way they are being taken away from us...) Amongst our liberties, is the freedom to pursue love.
This is where things can begin to get tricky. Before we can get into whether or not gays should be given the same tax benefits as traditionals , because that is what this whole debate is actually about, we need to first ask why can the government give the traditionals tax breaks? Or should the government give tax breaks? I would argue no, and I can't get into that here because this is already going to be long as it is. If I could have my way, the federal government would stay out of my churches, no matter what religion, and have no say or care of what a marriage is. After all Separation of Church and State was put in place to protect the Church from being controlled by the government. It does not mean that religion cannot be a part of the State.
So, in my perfect world, people would be married at their respective churches under their own beliefs and definitions of marriage and no one else would care. If you are a traditional Christian then you can go to your traditional Christian Church and get married and the government doesn't care because it makes no difference to them. And the same would go for gays, who could go to their respective institute and get married.The only disclaimer on this would be that local governments such as State or Municipal could limit this. The idea being that cultures in different areas are different but are often subject to cultural change and the laws that reflect these need to be easily accessible to the people of the local area for change and should therefore be on the lowest form of government reasonably possible. I may write more on this later.
However, it is a civil right--rights belonging to a person by reason of citizenship--as defined by the 14th amendment:
"Amendment XIV - Section I: All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. 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."
-The Constitution of the United States of America
We, as Americans, have a right to life, liberty, and property. These things cannot be taken away from a citizen of the United States of America without due process of law. (Which, by the way they are being taken away from us...) Amongst our liberties, is the freedom to pursue love.
This is where things can begin to get tricky. Before we can get into whether or not gays should be given the same tax benefits as traditionals , because that is what this whole debate is actually about, we need to first ask why can the government give the traditionals tax breaks? Or should the government give tax breaks? I would argue no, and I can't get into that here because this is already going to be long as it is. If I could have my way, the federal government would stay out of my churches, no matter what religion, and have no say or care of what a marriage is. After all Separation of Church and State was put in place to protect the Church from being controlled by the government. It does not mean that religion cannot be a part of the State.
So, in my perfect world, people would be married at their respective churches under their own beliefs and definitions of marriage and no one else would care. If you are a traditional Christian then you can go to your traditional Christian Church and get married and the government doesn't care because it makes no difference to them. And the same would go for gays, who could go to their respective institute and get married.The only disclaimer on this would be that local governments such as State or Municipal could limit this. The idea being that cultures in different areas are different but are often subject to cultural change and the laws that reflect these need to be easily accessible to the people of the local area for change and should therefore be on the lowest form of government reasonably possible. I may write more on this later.
RSS Feed