Tweet
Most people see the fight over Prop. 8 are about gay rights vs. traditional marriage and culture. And, it is.
But, the bigger question is Federalism, both the 10th and 14th Amendments.
"But if you continue to drill down it becomes clear that the root of the entire discussion is a debate on federalism, the relationship between the states and the national government. If California and the other 49 states are allowed to go in whatever directions they choose on the marriage issues, several versions of the definition of marriage are sure to emerge. That's more than satisfactory to traditionalists.
On the other hand, is it fair for such a basic concept of marriage to be defined in so many ways that your status is determined by where you live rather than who you are? That's where discussion of the 14th Amendment comes in.
The "no on 8" folks argue that if left in place, the law provides a different set of guarantees for heterosexuals than homosexuals, and thereby violates the "equal protection under the laws" concept of the 14th Amendment that is vital to guaranteeing the same treatment for all."
Washington does not give out marriage licenses--only the States. If the Supreme Court says NO to Prop. 8, then the States rights to issue marriage licenses will have been taken over by the Federal courts.
ObamaCare demanding individual citizens to buy health insurance is an unconstitutional act. The president telling Arizona it is OK for criminals to roam their State is also unconstitutional.
we are entering into the Obama era, where laws, rules and the Constitution no longer exists--it is what the Big Guy in the White House says it is.
We are all in trouble--because we are now living in a totalitarian State.
More...
But, the bigger question is Federalism, both the 10th and 14th Amendments.
"But if you continue to drill down it becomes clear that the root of the entire discussion is a debate on federalism, the relationship between the states and the national government. If California and the other 49 states are allowed to go in whatever directions they choose on the marriage issues, several versions of the definition of marriage are sure to emerge. That's more than satisfactory to traditionalists.
On the other hand, is it fair for such a basic concept of marriage to be defined in so many ways that your status is determined by where you live rather than who you are? That's where discussion of the 14th Amendment comes in.
The "no on 8" folks argue that if left in place, the law provides a different set of guarantees for heterosexuals than homosexuals, and thereby violates the "equal protection under the laws" concept of the 14th Amendment that is vital to guaranteeing the same treatment for all."
Washington does not give out marriage licenses--only the States. If the Supreme Court says NO to Prop. 8, then the States rights to issue marriage licenses will have been taken over by the Federal courts.
ObamaCare demanding individual citizens to buy health insurance is an unconstitutional act. The president telling Arizona it is OK for criminals to roam their State is also unconstitutional.
we are entering into the Obama era, where laws, rules and the Constitution no longer exists--it is what the Big Guy in the White House says it is.
We are all in trouble--because we are now living in a totalitarian State.
More...