When you strip away God, politics and emotion, this is a human rights issue.
Obviously it is a new challenge for religious authorities in the USA. They can adopt children together and receive an equitable division of property, should they divorce.
However, Americans display more ambivalence toward for-profit enterprises, as 35 percent say for-profit businesses should be legally required to provide services for a same-sex wedding.
If a couple in any of these states is unmarried and considering marriage, they would be wise to take the time to analyze the legal and financial implications of marriage, rather than rush to the altar, as we saw happen in California in 2013, when same-sex marriage became legal there.
The Supreme Court’s marriage decision has made our union, as President Barack Obama said, “a little more ideal”, but more work remains.
We were disheartened after that Election Day, but we expected those heartbreaking losses to be followed with successful lawsuits in state courts challenging laws that prohibited same-sex couples from marrying. In its landmark June 26 decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, the court declared marriage is a constitutional right extended to everyone regardless of sexual orientation. State Rep. Greg Leding, D-Fayetteville, filed a bill to that effect during this year’s regular legislative session, but the bill failed to gain traction. It is, some say, the most effective instrument by which State control is exercised. Heterosexual couples can still have babies, raise them well, create safe environments for the women, bring stability for the men, and lead to a lower rate of crime and poverty.
The Supreme Court’s ruling prompts other interesting questions.
Fundamental religious liberties, of course, are protected by the First Amendment. Quite simply, freedom of speech shouldn’t be impinged upon; we should be careful to guard against this. What is important to remember is that those who opposed making marriage a central tenet of the gay faith were not opposing the right to equality under law.
Yes, the evolution of public opinion in the United States on gay marriage has moved quickly in the past few decades. What is hate speech, and what is a hate crime?
But some conflicts between the rights of gay couples and religious organizations are likely to find their way into the courts. No members of the clergy would ever be forced to conduct a private gay marriage ceremony if it went against their religious beliefs.
He pointed to Justice Anthony Kennedy’s majority opinion, in which he wrote, “it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, honest conviction that, by divine precepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned”. But homosexual activists knew that wasn’t going to fly, so they took it to the courts where judicial activists could bypass democracy and the constitution and force it on the American people. Imposing those beliefs on others and infringing on their now-legal rights, however, is not acceptable.
It is business as usual when it comes to issuing marriage licenses, Barbara Simpson, Coryell County clerk, said Thursday. It is a peace so many have fought for, a peace not yet accessible to all of us, and where it exists, we must embrace and cherish it. Homosexuality is shown in our history.
Much of what we see happening today parallels the black Civil Rights movement – the good and the bad. Fayetteville is set to vote on a proposed anti-discrimination ordinance September 8, after repealing an earlier one previous year. “On the other hand, if the employer covers only same-sex unmarried partners, it might deem it most fair to require those employees to marry in order to retain their benefits”. He said he found objections to same-sex marriage under the banner of religious freedom “offensive”.