Nowhere in the Constitution are we, as American citizens, granted the right to marry. Thus, it is not unconstitutional to deny marriage to same-sex couples — or straight couples, for that matter.
Denying marriage rights to a particular group of people is a civil rights issue.
“Gay people live in 50 Americas,” said CNN columnist John Sutter. “Some states allow same-sex couples to adopt. Others, such as Mississippi, ban it. . . . Some states protect GLBT tenants from being evicted because of who they are. Others, such as Louisiana and Montana, don’t seem to think that matters.”
The list goes on.
The United States’ lack of unity on this issue is similar to racial issues of the early 20th century. In some states, a person was considered black if they had one-fourth black ancestry. In others, the rule was one-eighth or one-sixteenth. And in others still, like Tennessee and Virginia, people were black if they had “one drop” of Negro blood.
As pointed out in California Newsreel’s three-part documentary, Race — The Power of an Illusion, a person would literally change races by crossing state lines.
But just as it is federal law that you cannot fire, evict or otherwise discriminate someone on the basis of race, it should be federal law that you cannot do any of these things on the basis of sexual orientation.
This week, the Supreme Court will hear two cases about gay marriage. First is Proposition 8, California’s 2008 ballot initiative similar to North Carolina’s Amendment One, which defines marriage as between a man and a woman.
It passed with 52 percent of the vote, but last February the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Prop 8 because it “serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California and to officially reclassify their relationship and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples.”
The Supreme Court will also hear United States v. Windsor, which challenges the Defense of Marriage Act. Just like Prop 8, DOMA, signed into law by President Bill Clinton, defines marriage as between a man and a woman. However, unlike Prop 8, this case “does not address whether there is a fundamental right under the Constitution to gay marriage,” according to ABC News.
No, marriage may not be a right explicitly stated in the Constitution. It’s a privilege. However, this privilege has subsequent benefits that a person should not be denied as a result of his or her sexual orientation.
Same-sex couples cannot receive marriage benefits because they cannot marry. This is hurtful specifically to gay couples running for office. Members of the Caplin & Drysdale’s Political Law Group filed a brief in United States v. Windsor. The brief describes how DOMA “unfairly burdens the freedoms of political association, which is protected under the First Amendment.”
They argued that DOMA is damaging to gay couples running for office because “married gay and lesbian candidates who run for federal office may not fund their campaigns using personal resources that are available to other married candidates.” They also found that “individuals in same-sex marriages may not attend certain political meetings or interact with certain political groups that are open to other married citizens.”
Furthermore, domestic partners cannot jointly file their federal taxes. Therefore they cannot enjoy some of the benefits of filing jointly, such as lower taxes or a potentially higher standard deduction.
The two court cases regarding gay marriage will be decided by the end of June. While marriage may not be protected in the Bill of Rights, it is unfair to allocate this privilege only to heterosexuals. Same-sex marriage is as wrong as an African American sitting at the front of the bus — which is not wrong at all.
