Should Same-Sex Couple Receive Constitutional Protection?
- Submitted by: saniah
- Views: 542
- Category: Politics: Political Science
- Date Submitted: 07/08/2012 06:18 PM
- Pages: 4
- Report this Essay
Should Same-sex Couple Receive Constitutional Protection?
The spring of 2001, Massachusetts constitution overruled seven same sex couple to marry and/or bring up a child/ children. Which caused these couples to a trial in the Massachusetts Supreme Court, that their denial was unconstitutional and a violation to their liberal rights to marriage. The plaintiff pleaded that it was a violation of freedom and equality. Equality is given to all Americans and should not be discriminated because of sex, race, color, or nationality (297). The Massachusetts Supreme Court denied their rights to same-sex marriage because same-sex couple cannot raise a child to grow up in sociality normally. Many people also believe that marriage is between a man and a woman; and that homosexaul marriage is immoral.
Margaret Marshall, Majority Opinion Goodridge et al. v. Department of Public Health, states that marriage is a constitutional right to everyone. Marriage is a decision that two people make to commit themselves financially, legally, and socially, and for their children (299). Marshall argues in that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States protects the rights for adults to choose who they want to marry and they have the right to have children or not. The Fourteenth Amendment protect the right of the individual's privacy, liberty and equality of having the ability to marriage the persons of your choice. There is also nothing in the Fourteenth Amendment that says homosexuals cannot marry. Therefore they should be allowed to bear a child and have a family.
Marshall brings up a couple important questions whether same-sex marriage is a violation to the Massachusetts Constitution. She analyzes it in two ways; “Does it offend the constitution’s guarantees of equality before the law? Or do the liberty and due process provisions of the massachusetts Constitution secure the plaintiff’s right to marry their chosen partner?” (301). What is she asking that it does not infringe on other...
The spring of 2001, Massachusetts constitution overruled seven same sex couple to marry and/or bring up a child/ children. Which caused these couples to a trial in the Massachusetts Supreme Court, that their denial was unconstitutional and a violation to their liberal rights to marriage. The plaintiff pleaded that it was a violation of freedom and equality. Equality is given to all Americans and should not be discriminated because of sex, race, color, or nationality (297). The Massachusetts Supreme Court denied their rights to same-sex marriage because same-sex couple cannot raise a child to grow up in sociality normally. Many people also believe that marriage is between a man and a woman; and that homosexaul marriage is immoral.
Margaret Marshall, Majority Opinion Goodridge et al. v. Department of Public Health, states that marriage is a constitutional right to everyone. Marriage is a decision that two people make to commit themselves financially, legally, and socially, and for their children (299). Marshall argues in that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States protects the rights for adults to choose who they want to marry and they have the right to have children or not. The Fourteenth Amendment protect the right of the individual's privacy, liberty and equality of having the ability to marriage the persons of your choice. There is also nothing in the Fourteenth Amendment that says homosexuals cannot marry. Therefore they should be allowed to bear a child and have a family.
Marshall brings up a couple important questions whether same-sex marriage is a violation to the Massachusetts Constitution. She analyzes it in two ways; “Does it offend the constitution’s guarantees of equality before the law? Or do the liberty and due process provisions of the massachusetts Constitution secure the plaintiff’s right to marry their chosen partner?” (301). What is she asking that it does not infringe on other...