DOMA Argumentative Essay

Obergefell v. Hodges (2014) The Obergefell v. Hodges (2014) case involved the marriage of same sex couples. Groups of same sex couples sued their state agencies to challenge the constitutionality of them refusing to recognize legal same sex marriages. Plaintiffs argued that the states’ statutes violated the Equal Protection Clause and Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.

In spite of the fact that a privilege to marry is not listed in the Constitution, the Court said that such a privilege is covered under the Fourteenth Amendment in light of the fact that such choices are vital to our survival and our values. Accordingly, they should essentially reside with the individual instead of with the state. This choice is a conflict with the popular argument that something cannot be an actual constitutional right unless it is spelled out straightforwardly in the U.S. Constitution. It additionally stands out amongst the most imperative models on the general thought of common uniformity, clarifying that essential social equality is basic to our reality and cannot really be restricted on the grounds that a few people trust that their god can 't help

In the majority opinion, the justices outlined that gay Americans have a right to "intimate association" beyond merely freedom from

Although marriage and civil unions should be recognized under the Full Faith and Credit Clause it was not because this clause was primarily used for judicial rulings and was not thought to apply to marriages or civil union licenses. This deals with the recognition of same sex marriages in states, it also deals with the relationship between states. At the time some states such as New York recognized same-sex civil marriages but whether these unions were recognized in other states was an entirely different story. This went on for a while until it was determined that DOMA was not only discriminatory but also went against the Full Faith and Credit

First of all, a while ago an interracial couple from Virginia was banished from the state because of their marriage, so they took the issue to the Supreme Court. “ Mildred Loving, a black woman whose anger over being banished from Virginia for marrying a white man led to a landmark Supreme Court ruling overturning state miscegenation laws” (Martinmay 1). This shows that this couple was strong throughout their life, and they made it easier by defeating the injustice. Since they were married and were different races, it was illegal. They both saw it as unfair, especially since they were banned from Virginia just because of their marriage.

Rule: The Supreme Court mandated in favor of the state of Georgia; Homosexual sexual activities were ruled to be neither “implicit in the concept of ordered liberty” or “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” (pp. 506) Despite what the Court of Appeals found, no previous cases of the Court had supported that the Constitution allowed for an expansion of privacy towards homosexual sodomy. In fact, homosexual acts were criminal acts under the common law, and were prohibited in the laws that were established in the thirteen states during the approval of the Bill of Rights. Homosexual sodomy was also illegal under the laws in almost all states, excluding five, around the time the Fourteenth Amendment was signed, and in 1961 in all fifty states.

The equality act holds the evidence of allowing everyone to be considered and given permission to be equal and have rights. But because of the rules against marriage between two different people not in the same race, the act is not being followed and being held back from these people and their natural born rights. Mildred Loving and her white husband Richard Loving got married in Washington since miscegenation laws didn’t allow them to marry in Virginia, they came back to their home and arrested later in the middle of the night because they were living together and because they were together and married they got jailed for a year and banished from Virginia for twenty five years. These laws made them guilty for just loving each other and living together. Miscegenation laws take away their rights to do all of those things and they make the white man unequal to the colored person.

Liberals support same-sex marriage and argue that love is grounds enough for marriage, regardless of sexual orientation. Conservatives are usually opposed and often cite religious viewpoints and concerns about the reading of children as the main reasons for their opposition. In the 1970s the court case Baker v. Nelson occurred. It was a case in which the Minnesota Supreme Court ruled that a state law limiting marriage to persons of the opposite sex did not violate the U.S. Constitution. On June 26, 2015 the United States Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage in all 50 states.

There is discrimination in this world to this day, there is discriminations against “people who are gay”. This discrimination is just like the Holocaust, because the Germans didn’t like the jews. I believe the gay marriage should have been approved long before it was. People need to realize judging someone because they are gay is wrong, that person is obviously an idiot. It is not up to people to judge other people because they are gay.

The future of same-sex marriage has long been a question in the United States; on June 26, 2015, under the U.S. Supreme Court decision of Obergefell v. Hodges, the country finally got an answer. In a five to four decision, the Supreme court determined that under the Fourteenth Amendment, marriage between same- sex couples is legal in all fifty states. Under this decision, states that had previously banned same-sex marriage will have to recognize and permit same-sex marriage within their boundaries. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Obergefell v. Hodges is a landmark decision that will not affect same-sex couples throughout the nation, but also every aspect of our society. Having been hired by a sociologist who wants to study the effect of

The Civil Rights Movement gained traction around the 1950s, paving the way for many other oppressed groups. These groups fought for different rights, but they still had a similar struggle to the original movement. One of these groups is the Gay Rights Movement. The comparison between the black civil rights movement and the gay civil rights movement is “typically a sensitive subject, even among liberals” (Williams). Some people believe that it is unfair to compare a fight for marriage to a fight to gain equality in every aspect.

Hodges (2015) the Supreme Court held that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantees the right to marry as one of the fundamental liberties it protects, applying to same-sex couples the same as opposite-sex couples. This case was brought forward by numerous groups of same-sex couples who were suing their relevant state agencies to challenge the constitutionality of those states’ same-sex marriage laws. The Supreme Court found that there is no difference between same-sex marriages and opposite-sex marriages, therefore, the exclusion of same-sex couples from the right to marry violates the Due Process Clause. This is policy making because the Supreme Court forced states to change their laws by deciding that it was against the constitution to not only ban the recognition of same-sex marriages that occurred in states that allowed it, but also making same-sex marriage legal in all states. Government officials even those who do not believe in the law change must abide by it, by allowing same-sex couples their now legal right to be married and receive the benefits that opposite-sex married couples receive; changing the way that citizens and the government interact in societal ways but also financial

We are allowed to voice our opinions. There is separation of church and state, which means that there can’t be laws made about religion. Recently, gay marriage was made legal in all fifty states. However, a judge in Kentucky has denied same-sex couples marriage licenses. It could be argued that if she denied it for her own religious beliefs, it violates the First Amendment.

With almost half the nation divided among their views, abortion remains one of the most controversial topics in our society. Since Roe v. Wade, our views in society as well as following court cases have been progressing toward the woman’s right to choose. The precedent set by Roe v. Wade made the Supreme Court acknowledge that it cannot rule specifically when life begins and it also affirms that it is the woman’s right to have an abortion under the 14th Amendment. In the 1st Amendment, the Establishment Clause forbids the government from passing laws “which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another”. Many Christian pro-lifers use their religious beliefs to dispute when life begins. Although through the Free Exercise

There were two sides of this legislation. The first side made marriage and the bearing of children a duty to the state. To ensure better results, the state offered incentives, such as tax breaks, to citizens who observed the laws and imposed several impairments on citizens who refused (Wiki). These laws enforced marriage *upon young men and women within similar age ranges, and remarriage on the divorced and widowed person within certain time limits***. The other side of this legislation placed family morality in higher