Recently in Boston Massachusetts, Attorney General Martha Coakley is filing a lawsuit challenging the federal Defense of Marriage Act- which highlights two major things:
- No state (or other political subdivision within the United States) needs to treat a relationship between persons of the same sex as a marriage, even if the relationship is considered a marriage in another state.
- The federal government defines marriage as a legal union exclusively between one man and one woman. "
* source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defense_of_Marriage_Act (its from wiki but it looked like the info was pretty accurate)
Last Thursday, Coakley asks a judge to deem the law unconstitutional without holding a trial on the lawsuit. She argues that martial status should be left up to the states and that " the federal law treats married heterosexual couples and married same-sex couples differently on Medicaid benefits and burial in veterans' cemeteries."
Massachusetts is the first state to pass the law on gay marriage and is now the first state to challenge this law.
Questions: Is it fair that marriage could be valid in one state (such as MA) and not be valid in another? Does this only pertain to marriages of same sex? Doesn't this mean, then that heterosexual marriages could also be "invalid" then in other states? Is not a discrimination then to have the ability (which is given in the Defense of Marriage Act) to pick and choose which marriages are valid?
I think it is fair for marriage to be legal in state a not another, as it is a state issue. It pertains to all marriage, not solely same sex marriages, so, yes heterosexual marriages could be void in certain states. While it can be discriminatory, having the ability to decide which marriage are and are not valid remain a state issue allows the option of having a same sex marriage. While it is unfair for homosexuals to have to move to a state that allows marriage, if it were not a state issue, there is the chance that same sex marriage would be void everywhere.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I do agree with the Parthenon's reasoning, I do not believe that just because one has a valid marriage in one state that it could be considered invalid in another. Marriage should not be limited to the boundaries within a state (even if it is considered a state issue-this should then be amended). Life causes us to move. Let's say one same sex couple married in Massachusetts and so happenly had to move because they were relocated because of their job. It is their fault that they have to move and therefore lose all the legal/other benefits that go along with having the title of being "married"? It's not right. If the law was different, it may be true that everyone would go to MA, for example, and marry there only to move to another state, but I believe if such a HUGE issue is legal in one state it might as well be legal everywhere.
ReplyDelete