NC's constitutional ban on gay unions

[Wreckem]

If an unconstitutional law is passed, it is the duty of the judicial branch to strike it down. That is one of their primary purposes. In this way we are able to keep our constitutional rights intact.

Even if it makes it to the State Constitution, it may still run afoul of the Federal Constitution and therefor be nullified. Much the same as if a state put in a state constitutional amendment saying women and blacks cannot vote in the state for any election. I leave the determination as to if it will violate the federal constitution up to the experts, though.



I agree that marriage should be a federal issue, it must be portable across state lines.

It used to be because of the Full Faith and Credit clause. But then DOMA, which legislates around the Full Faith and Credit clause (DOMA is facially unconstitutional), made it where states didn't have to recognize other states gay marriages or civil unions. Marriage has historically always been a state issue. DOMA is why the IRS cannot recognize gay marriages. The IRS would recognize gay marriage if DOMA did not exist.

And it doesn't matter where marriage was derived. Legal marriage in the US is not a religious institution, it is a contract between two consenting adults.

 

[shadow9d9]

Fear has led the republicans to keep doubling down on their stupidity. It will not stop gay marriage from being completely acceptable everywhere in the US in the near future.

 

[cybrsage]

It used to be because of the Full Faith and Credit clause. But then DOMA, which legislates around the Full Faith and Credit clause (DOMA is facially unconstitutional), made it where states didn't have to recognize other states gay marriages or civil unions. Marriage has historically always been a state issue. DOMA is why the IRS cannot recognize gay marriages. The IRS would recognize gay marriage if DOMA did not exist.

Ah, thanks. Did not know that.

And it doesn't matter where marriage was derived. Legal marriage in the US is not a religious institution, it is a contract between two consenting adults.

It does matter, since that is what causes the emotional involvement in the issue. Removing the emotional trigger moves the issue into the purely legal realm, where it is far easier to make changes.

 

[cybrsage]

Fear has led the republicans to keep doubling down on their stupidity. It will not stop gay marriage from being completely acceptable everywhere in the US in the near future.

By "near future" do you mean in the next several decades or next several days?

 

[peonyu]

Fear has led the republicans to keep doubling down on their stupidity. It will not stop gay marriage from being completely acceptable everywhere in the US in the near future.

Civil Unions I agree it will likely happen. The problem is the religious angle, and its not just Christians who get mad over "Gay" marriage...Muslims are worse when it comes to gay rights [far worse] and they are the fastest growing religion in the US today. Jews are another large block of religious people in this country, the religious ones are likely to not be pro-gay marriage either.

If we remove the Government from Marriage, as others have said and limit the Gov to only Civil unions this would be much easier to resolve.

 

[PokerGuy]

Are these the same "zealous activist judges" who legislated from the United States Supreme Court bench and overturned the anti-gun law in D.C.?

You need to read the 2nd amendment. You know, the whole "shall not be infringed" part. Heller simply affirmed what the amendment says. No activism at all. Had the court come up with some new rules that were not in the amendment (all people should be forced to own a weapon), that would be activism.

 

[werepossum]

It used to be because of the Full Faith and Credit clause. But then DOMA, which legislates around the Full Faith and Credit clause (DOMA is facially unconstitutional), made it where states didn't have to recognize other states gay marriages or civil unions. Marriage has historically always been a state issue. DOMA is why the IRS cannot recognize gay marriages. The IRS would recognize gay marriage if DOMA did not exist.

And it doesn't matter where marriage was derived. Legal marriage in the US is not a religious institution, it is a contract between two consenting adults.

DOMA is indeed an abortion of a bill. I'm surprised it hasn't yet been tossed out. My own support of gay marriage aside, it's a bad precedent to start picking things that are states' rights but exempt from other states' honoring.

You need to read the 2nd amendment. You know, the whole "shall not be infringed" part. Heller simply affirmed what the amendment says. No activism at all. Had the court come up with some new rules that were not in the amendment (all people should be forced to own a weapon), that would be activism.

Very well put.