Redefining #marriage to include same-sex marriage could set precedent for other more deviant forms of marriage

By -


U.S. District Judge Martin L.C. Feldman in his decision upholding Louisiana's same-sex marriage ban:

Feldman noted that Louisiana's marriage law furthers two important interests: "linking children to an intact family formed by their biological parents, as specifically underscored by Justice Kennedy in Windsor" and "safeguarding that fundamental social change…is better cultivated through democratic consensus." That is, Feldman noted the two central issues in this debate—the policy question: What is marriage, and the legal question: Who gets to define marriage. Feldman ruled that, consistent with the U.S. Constitution, citizens and their elected officials should get to define marriage, and they can define it as the union of man and woman if they choose to. In response to those who argue that there is no rational basis for such marriage laws, Feldman writes: "The Court is persuaded that a meaning of what is marriage that has endured in history for thousands of years, and prevails in a majority of states today, is not universally irrational."

Feldman cites the Supreme Court's decision in the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) case, U.S. v. Windsor, as support that Louisiana has the right to define marriage for itself. Feldman writes: "Windsor repeatedly and emphatically reaffirmed the longstanding principle that the authority to regulate the subject of domestic relations belongs to the states, subject to indistinct future constitutional guarantees that in Windsor were, by its expressed limits, left open and rather inexact."

When the Supreme Court struck down part of DOMA, Justice Anthony Kennedy explained, "The significance of state responsibilities for the definition and regulation of marriage dates to the Nation's beginning." Taking Kennedy at his word, Feldman emphasizes the basic equality of state citizens and the vital importance of democratic debate. Just as citizens are free to redefine marriage to include same-sex relationships, so too are citizens free to retain the historic definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman—as citizens in a majority of states have done. The U.S. Constitution is silent on what marriage is. Judges should not insert their own policy preferences about marriage and declare them to be required by the Constitution. "It is not for this Court to resolve the wisdom of same-sex marriage. The nation is witness to a strong conversation about what is marriage." The courts should uphold the freedom of the American people and their elected representatives to make marriage policy.

Feldman accepts that Louisiana's voters had a rational basis to define marriage as the union of a man and woman: "Louisiana's laws and Constitution are directly related to achieving marriage's historically preeminent purpose of linking children to their biological parents. Louisiana's regime pays respect to the democratic process; to vigorous debate…The fact that marriage has many differing, even perhaps unproved dimensions, does not render Louisiana's decision irrational."

Feldman questions where the re-definition of marriage will lead: "Must the states permit or recognize a marriage between an aunt and niece? Aunt and nephew? Brother/brother? Father and child? May minors marry? Must marriage be limited to only two people? What about a transgender spouse? Is such a union same-gender or male-female? All such unions would undeniably be equally committed to love and caring for one another, just like the plaintiffs."

Don't forget that the US Supreme Court in the 2013 U.S. v. Windsor and Hollingsworth v. Perry, did not decide along the lines of the "Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the 14th Amendment" as Alaska District Judge Burgess here states.

You say "the Bureau of Immigration of the Philippines considers homosexuality to be a mental illness and it is grounds for denying a residence visa. Any foreign individual discovered engaging in homosexual activities can be blacklisted and asked to leave the country without the process of appeal." Interesting. Can you cite references for this policy? To date, I have read, Singapore still does not recognize that anal penetration (a male homosexual act) is a constitutional right, but they do distinguish from treating homosexual individuals unjustly.

I don't argue on urgency of any law or whether or not it is trendy, that, can also be democratically determined, that is exactly why local LGBT activist groups are free to lobby the Philippine Congress to support their cause just as much as any local group can on their advocacies (i.e. CBCP and other such religious and non-religious groups formed by Filipinos). We may not like what they are saying or their opinion about it, but it is equally their right to be heard by congress as to (1) what laws to pass and also (2) which laws are priority within the limited time that congress has.

-------------------
This is a GRP Featured Comment. Join the discussion!
http://getrealphilippines.com/blog/2014/10/is-same-sex-marriage-a-more-important-issue-than-divorce/comment-page-1/#comment-838300

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular this week

Leni Robredo has become a sad mechanical puppet and an embarrassment to Filipinos

By -
Image
Guess who has taken over Leila de Lima’s place on the anti-Duterte international speaking circuit? Watch this video that Leni Robredo made for an international NGO event in Vienna tomorrow. Warning: this will REALLY make your blood boil. If you have vertigo, sit down and take a deep breath before watching. You know what’s really sickening about this video? It’s not even the lies and exaggerations that Robredo is saying about what’s going on in the Philippines and how Pinoys feel about it (as if she’s in any position to speak for the Filipino people, who mostly hate her guts). It’s the hollowness and emptiness of the way she mechanically reads from a script that obviously someone else wrote. She’s making huge claims about thousands of people being summarily killed by police, but her eyes and voice are absolutely empty of emotion or conviction. She’s just a puppet playing a role, who doesn’t even understand what she’s doing or saying, she’s just mindlessly following her owner’
Read more

Response to Sass Rogando Sasot: Duterte has supporters who are not blind beholden emos

By -
Image
So Sass Rogando Sasot posted a reaction on her FB page to defend Andanar : Regarding the GRP Short article on Andanar being suspected as a “mole.” Ang premise nila eh si Andanar eh walang ginagawa to protect the “international image” of the president. FYI, in order for you to counter the PR of those who would like to bring down Duterte, you need to spend A LOT OF MONEY for international PR. Mahal po ang international PR. Si Duterte po ang ayaw gumastos for international PR. Yup, Duterte is not like PNoy’s admin who spent a filthy amount of tax payer’s money for international PR. I think someone on Get Real Post already pointed out before that Sasot is book-smart but lacks common sense. We see proof of that once again here. Does regularly monitoring and editing Duterte’s Wikipedia page to give foreigners more balanced info cost a lot of money? No, it doesn’t. It’s certainly cheaper than what Andanar is wasting every month printing a useless local monthly tabloid that reaches
Read more

Jo Lapira: youth wasted on Joma Sison's bankrupt communist ideology

By -
Image
“Youth is wasted on the young”, they used to say. If you send your daughter or son, to universities, like the University of the Philippines. You send him or her, to learn about the subjects, of the field, he/she is hoping to finish and graduate. Not waste his/her time on bankrupt political ideologies like communism. Jo Lapira, the NPA casualty is a good example. Her parents, may have been slaving to earn money to send her, to college and give her a good education, so that, after graduation, she could have a good job and a good career, to better her life. However, she wasted this opportunity in her life fighting for an ideology she hardly understood. She wasted her life; and now her life ends tragically, in a clash with the AFP. Those who still believe this communist ideology is the panacea of our country’s problems should realise that this communist ideology is a failed ideology. It has been tested, and the communist theory of workers’ utopia, is a Delusion, and a Mirage. What
Read more

Jose Rizal never had Tagalog in mind when he encouraged us to love our own language

By -
Image
Posted by a certain Chloe Santiago on the Facebook GRP Community Group : Jose Rizal died in 1896 and Tagalog was declared the official language of the Philippine only in 1937. This can only mean that Rizal wasn't really talking about Tagalog when he made this statement: "He who does not love his own language is worse than an animal and smelly fish." Indeed. Who made the arbitrary directive to make the Tagalog dialect the "National Language" to begin with? Furthermore, why have a "National Language" when Filipinos are already proficient in the global lingua franca of commerce and scientific achievement?
Read more