I have made no secret of the fact that I am against gay marriage, so it may come as a surprise to some that I am happy with this ruling. I have also made no secret of the fact that I am a huge supporter of the tenth amendment and the rights of states.
Marriage is not the issue of the federal government. It never has been and will remain that way unless a constitutional amendment on the issue is passed. While I would like to see that amendment, the chances of it passing at this point in time is basically nill. Due to that, I have to support this ruling. Marriage is a state issue and I have never been able to wrap my brain around how a legal marriage could not be recognized by the federal government.
Even Justice Alito acknowledges in his dissent that the constitution doesn't speak on the issue:
no provision of the Constitution speaks to the issue.
If no provision speaks to the issue and Americans fully expect our government to treat people equally under the law, what is the justification for the federal government to decide which legally married couple they give benefits to and which couples they don't?
As a limited government. constitutional conservative, I couldn't find a justifiable reason for that particular section of DOMA being upheld. This doesn't change my views of gay marriage. I am against it. But marriage is state issue, not a federal one. This is an issue that must be fought on the state level. If states are going to legalize gay marriage, the federal government has no right to overrule that. Limited government means just that, limiting the power of the federal government.
The main section of DOMA has not been overturned, a state like Connecticut that has legalized gay marriage has no right to force a state like Virginia to recognize that marriage. As it should be.
No comments:
Post a Comment