Legalizing same-sex marriage has been a very hot topic for several years now. When the Supreme Court ruled in favor of same-sex marriage I assumed that most voted in favor and those that voted against was against same-sex marriage.
ACTUALLY this is much more complicated than that. After studying both sides of the measure I stand with Scalia, Thomas, Roberts and Alito and here is why.
Chief Justice Roberts said it perfectly in his dissent:
“It is not about whether, in my judgment, the institution of marriage should be changed to include same sex couples. It is instead about whether, in our democratic republic, that decision should rest with the people acting through their elected representatives, or with five lawyers who happen to hold commissions authorizing them to resolve legal disputes according to law.”
“When decisions are reached
through democratic means some people will inevitably be disappointed with the
results. But those whose views do not prevail at least know that they have had
their say, and accordingly are, in the tradition of our political culture,
reconciled to the result of a fair and honest debate. In addition, they can gear up to raise the
issue later, hoping to persuade enough on the winning side to think again. ‘That is exactly how our system of government
is supposed to work.’ But today the
Court puts a stop to all that. By
deciding this question under the Constitution.
The Court removes it from the realm of democratic decision. There will be consequences to shutting down
the political process on an issue of such profound public significance. Closing debate tends to close minds. People denied a voice are less likely to
accept the ruling of a court on an issue that does not seem to be the sort of
thing courts usually decide...’The political process was moving...not swiftly
enough for advocates of quick, complete change, but majoritarian institutions
were listening and acting. Heavy-handed
judicial intervention was difficult to justify and appears to have provoked not
resolved conflict.”
Scalia:
“who it is that rules me...Today’s decree says that my Ruler and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court...This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine...robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776, the freedom to govern themselves.”
Thomas:
"The Court's decision today is at odds not only with the Constitution but with the principles upon which our Nation was built. Since well before 1787, liberty has been understood as freedom from government action, not entitlement to government benefits. The framers created our Constitution to preserve that understanding of liberty. Yet the majority invokes our Constitution in the name of 'liberty' that the Framers would not have recognized, to the determent of the liberty they sought to protect...by straying from the text of the Constitution, substantive due process exalts judges at the expense of the People from whom they derive their authority...Aside from undermining the political process that protect our liberty, the majority's decision threatens the religious liberty our Nation has long sought to protect..."
The problem that most of us have, including myself, is we understood, or thought we understood, what was going on by listening to the media. Instead it is our responsibility to read both sides of the story then come up with our own opinion of how we feel.
After studying and reading both sides I believe this is an issue that belonged within the states, debated within the states, and decided within the states. This is a decision that should be decided between us as people and not by nine judges.
The worry about this decision is what will the Supreme Court decide on next?
Day by day our freedoms are being taken away. Will our religious freedoms be next?
Reading
Obergefell v. Hodges Court case
No comments:
Post a Comment