According to section 1 of the 14th amendment in the Constitution shouldn't same sex marriage be legalized?

Unfortunately, most people address the question on the basis of their own views of homosexuality. If you have some objection to homosexuality, then you're against same-sex marriage. Otherwise, you're likely to favor allowing it.

However, in a free society governed by a constitution, the answer is already right in front of us.

Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution prohibits "any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States" and guarantees "the equal protection of the laws."

It is clear that a direct reading of those clauses, as well as the precedents set under them

(see Loving v. Virginia, 1967; Turner v. Safley, 1987; Lawrence v. Texas, 2003; among others),

require legal recognition of same-sex marriage. If states are going to maintain the legal institution of marriage, and ascribe certain rights, privileges and protections to it, then marriage must be open to all adult citizens, not just those whose marital arrangements fit a narrow and exclusionary definition.

Simply put, if Man A wants to marry a woman, and Man B wants to marry a man, there is no constitutional basis for declaring that Man A should be afforded this legal privilege while Man B should not. Applying different standards to the two men flies in the face of the 14th Amendment, and the very definition of equal citizenship in a free society.

In other words, I would say this to opponents of gay marriage. If you love the Constitution, you have only two choices: legal marriage for all, or legal marriage for none.

Anything else is....well......un-American.

Am I right or wrong in what I'm asking and saying?

7 Answers

Relevance
  • 9 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Your details provide an interesting -- and valid, I think -- analysis.

    Notice that those opposing your view don't address the Constitutional question but instead go back to moral/religious arguments.

    (Maybe you would have been better off posting this in Politics.)

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Yes, same sex marriage should be legal, but so long as the majority remain bigoted against something, they can twist the laws to suit their views regardless of the constitution. They did the same with slavery, segregation and a woman's right to vote. And in some places, there used to be laws against atheists holding public office, a direct violation of the First Amendment.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    According to Leviticus 18:22, is this even a legitimate question? "Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable." I will pray for you.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    Legalizing something that is impossible by definition is a waste of time and effort. Legalizing flying cows won't enable them to actually fly.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    You might start by posting this on the politics forum.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 9 years ago

    You are completely right and I second your question.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    No that actually means that abortion should be illegal because those babies you liberals throw away deserve equal protection under the law.

    You are wrong

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.