Supreme Court deliberates two cases involving same-sex marriage

5 comments, Monday, April 8th, 2013, by Brandon Beckham, in Sports

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in two cases involving same-sex marriage: Hollingsworth v. Perry, dealing with California’s Proposition 8, and U.S. v. Windsor, dealing with the Defense of Marriage Act.

A ruling on what constitutes the definition of marriage, equal protection under the law and Constitutional rights may have an impact on American society. Other issues involve the rights of children and the power of individual states to regulate marriage.

Val Peterson, a House Representative of District 59 in the Utah Legislature, believes a ruling that redefines marriage will have an adverse effect on families.

“The family is the basic building block of society and once that begins to erode, so does society,” Peterson said.

Utah House Representative Mike Kennedy of District 27 believes individual states should decide the issue of marriage. He also thinks wedded same-sex couples shouldn’t be denied benefits

that are otherwise given to traditionally married couples, which the Defense of Marriage Act does.

gavel_web“I’m very uncomfortable with the Supreme Court defining marriage since society has
already done that for thousands of years,” Kennedy said.

The Defense of Marriage Act, also referred to as DOMA, is a federal law passed by Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton in 1996 that requires states to recognize only traditional marriages for federal benefits. Today, there are over 1,100 federal marriage benefits.

In the case of Windsor v. U.S., Edith Windsor wed Thea Spyer in Canada in May 2007. The couple later moved to New York, which legally recognized same-sex marriages performed in other jurisdictions. After the death of Spyer in 2009, Windsor was required to pay over $363,000 in federal taxes on inheritance of her wife’s estate because her marriage, though recognized in New York, was not recognized under DOMA.

If DOMA treated their same-sex marriage equally as traditional marriages, Windsor wouldn’t have paid taxes. Windsor filed a petition asking the Supreme Court for an immediate review of the case to expedite the proceedings and obtain a final decision.

Justice Anthony Kennedy warned that DOMA has a “real risk” of breaching the long-held tradition of the states defining marriage.

Utah House Representative Kennedy questions whether the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to be hearing such cases.

“I don’t see that as a problem when we extend the same benefits equally,” Rep. Kennedy said.

Justice Sonya Sotmayor had similar concerns with the federal government being involved in marriage.

“What gives the federal government the right to be concerned at all about what the definition of marriage is?” Sotomayor said.

In 2008, California citizens voted for Proposition 8, an amendment to the state constitution to read: “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” In 2012, the Federal Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down the law as unconstitutional. Proponents of Proposition 8 appealed to the Supreme Court.

“I think people should have the right to do what they want as long as they don’t hurt others,” said Scott Carrier, adjunct professor in UVU Communication Department, “Should we allow same-sex marriage? I don’t see why not.”

CNN reported last month that 38 U.S. states have banned same-sex marriage, either through legislation or constitutional amendments. Eight states and the District of Columbia allow same-sex marriages.

During the next couple of months, the Supreme Court will deliberate on arguments for both cases, with a ruling expected in June.

About Brandon Beckham

5 comments

  1. daniwitz13
    April 8th, 2013 16:15

    Homosexuality is only a “claim to be” entity. It is an Intangible so it can’t be detected in an Individual person. Yes, Homosexuality exists as a condition but there is no known method to detect it in the Person. One can lie about it and never be proven otherwise. They have to “out” themselves to be known. Parents cannot detect it and surprised when “told”. Gays Marry Straights and have Children with them and then come “out” and “claim” Gayness. Even when they “claim to be” it is NOT provable. How come years of being Unknown? If it can be detected, why do they have to come “out “ of the closet? Because intangibles are not definable. In a big crowd, can you pick out the Homosexuals. In a crowd of a 100, two will be Homosexuals, according to a “survey” of 2% of our Nation. Can you pick out that two? But you could pick out the African American or the blond, but not the…

    Reply

  2. daniwitz13
    April 8th, 2013 23:48

    This issue is not about Tax exemptions or Equal protection under the Law. The issue is about the Formula that made you, me, the Supreme Court Judges and EVERYTHING attributed to Mankind. It is a simple equality Formula, one of each, a MALE and FEMALE. It brought us from the past to the present and destined to take us to the Future. This one Formula does NOT need an Orientation Formula to drag along. A Formula that cannot help but hinder Mankind. It has performed for Millions of years and produced Hundreds of Millions from the beginning of time. No other Formula exists so it is Zero to Hundreds of Millions. To infer that a simple Orientation is equal to it, is impossible. People our Mankind and People make our Govt. and Govt. is, of, by and for the People. Therefore, what makes People is Govt. TOP concern. The Feds. can dictate what the Formula is and the State the requirements. Pity.

    Reply

  3. bob
    April 9th, 2013 6:41

    hello my name is bob i love my husband i think it should be legal.

    Reply

    • daniwitz13
      June 7th, 2013 23:06

      To Bob. Yes, Bob, it should be legal to love him. it is not against the Law to love someone. Your Love is Equal to Obama’s Love. Pity.

      Reply

  4. daniwitz13
    June 9th, 2013 23:50

    DOMA should stand for the “Defense of Mankind Act”. The only way for Marriage to occur is to have a Mankind, (people) One can’t have Marriage with no People. Mankind comes first. Mankind only has two Genders to work with, a Male and Female. One of each is for perfect Equality. This pairing makes all of Mankind and Mankind makes everything Manmade. Oddly enough, it also makes, aberrantly, Homosexuals. An Orientation different from their Mother and Father and the Formula of Mankind. It is inconceivable that another Equal Formula can be gotten from only two Genders. If inequality is what one wants, then that is what homosexuality is, inequality. It selects one Gender and shuns and excludes the other Gender. They cannot further Mankind and can’t even further their kind. It is all done by the Male and Female Formula. It is a dead end Orientation. It depends entirely on the M/F…

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>