Gay Marriage. By: Valerie Wirtschafter Raquel Rosenberg. The Defense of Marriage Act of 1996. it provides that no State shall be required to give effect to a law of any other State with respect to a same-sex “marriage."
Massachusetts is the first state to, not only give same-sex partners all the constitutional rights of the constitution, but also call these “unions” marriage.Vermont vs. Massachusetts
Massachusetts has the better solution to the question of same-sex union. Vermont goes ¾ of the way, but refuses to take the full leap forward in recognizing legal marriages.
Gay and lesbian Americans are far more concerned about family matters such as jobs, education, and health care than they are about sexual matters.
seven Senate Republicans were wary of wading into the politically risky issue and voted against bringing the proposed amendment to a final vote.
Supporters went in knowing they could not get the two-thirds majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment, much less the 60 votes needed to cut off debate and bring the measure to a final vote.
GEORGE BUSH’S VIEW
Protect “the values that carry a moral society, and ... defend the family and the sacred institution of marriage.”
“even if the Defense of Marriage Act is upheld [by the Supreme Court], the law does not protect marriage within any state or city.”"The Constitution says nothing about marriage.”
ATTEMPTING TO BAN:
New MexicoStates Trying to Pass Anti-Gay Marriage Legislation
If a person is a supporter of both gay marriage and states’ rights it will be difficult to pass governmental initiatives in support of same-sex marriage. As seen before with Civil Rights and abortion laws, when certain controversial decisions are left to the people, unanimous decisions are rare. If we keep gay marriage a state issue, it is likely that the debate will not end. As evident with abortion and Civil Rights, when the federal government took control, the constitutional law was passed, regardless of religious belief or personal prejudices.
While some issues are important to be left to the state, when constant bickering prevents decisions from being effective, it becomes necessary for the federal government to step in and make a concrete choice. Regardless, our federal system needs revisions. If the federal government assume the responsibilities of the state governments on a whim, the so called “balance of powers” between the state and the national government is rendered obsolete.