Same-Sex Marriage Ban
Eric Minor, NEWS9 from the Web, October 6, 2006
CHARLESTON, W. Va. Oct. 5 -- It is a commercial that is hard to miss.It shows a traditional marriage ceremony in a church with a bride and a groom.But at the end, the bride’s veil is lifted to reveal a man’s face just before the couple lean in for a kiss.The real twist is that the ad calls for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The advertisement ends with a voice-over narration: “Don't let liberal judges and homosexuals make a mockery of marriage.” The commercial has generated a strong response via calls and e-mails coming in to the NEWS9 newsroom. One viewer called to say he was “mortified.” Another was “disgusted” by the commercial. Some viewers saw no problem with the commercial or its message. “I do not believe men and men and women and women should be together,” one viewer told NEWS9.“I am 100 percent for banning gay marriage,” said another.The commercial was paid for by the West Virginia Family Foundation, a branch of the American Family Association.The ad is aimed at driving viewers to the Foundation’s Web site and to a petition calling for a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage."If they wish, they may support marriage between one man and one woman and a state constitutional amendment,” said Foundation President Kevin McCoy. “We in no way promote a candidate or anything like that."McCoy told NEWS9 his group never intended to cause controversy with the advertisement.Andrew Schneider, the director of the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, disputed that claim and said the ad uses shock value to encourage discrimination. “They have the right to express their viewpoint,” said Schneider. “It’s unfortunate that their viewpoint is directed toward inflaming prejudices such as excluding certain individuals from marriage.”Six years ago, West Virginia lawmakers legally defined marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. The West Virginia Family Foundation petition suggests a constitutional amendment would have a better chance of surviving legal challenges.
What is Legal Marriage?
Legal marriage is a civil contract established through a license issued by state governments in the United States of America.
Legal marriage, more commonly referred to as civil marriage, is a contract between two individuals and the state, which is recognized socially, legally and politically at all levels of society.
Civil marriage has no impact on a religious organization's autonomy. It is therefore important to differentiate between civil marriage and religious marriage. We will use the term married to refer to persons who have entered into a legally recognized civil marriage. No clergy member of faith tradition can be forced to perform or recognize a civil marriage. However the refusal of a clergy member or faith tradition to perform or recognize a marriage has no impact on the ability of a couple to enjoy the legal rights of their civil marriage.
For a more detailed exploration of the marriage issue, you may download a copy of the Marriage Fact Sheet produced by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders. They also have other related publications.
Married couples are entitled to over 1,000 rights, benefits, privileges and responsibilities which are intended to foster the formation and stability of family, promote the well-being of children, if any, and ensure the rights of individuals when families are torn apart by death divorce, or serious illness.
A few examples may help you get a better understanding. In the event of death in a civil marriage, the surviving spouse has the automatic right to inherit even if there is no will. Gay & Lesbian couples cannot marry and do not have the automatic right to inherit their deceased spouses estate. Additionally, even if a surviving spouse in a Gay & Lesbian couple is protected by a will, there are a variety of tax issues that may result, for example, in the surviving Gay & lesbian spouse having to sell the house in which the couple lived for decades.
Another example is Social Security. Spouses of persons who have contributed to Social Security by paying FICA taxes are entitled to spousal and survivors benefits. Since same gender couples cannot get married, they are neither entitled to spousal benefits or survivors benefits even though they pay the same taxes. In addition, defined pension plans offered by employers provide benefits to the surviving spouse after the death of the retired worker. Although some companies have voluntarily extended similar benefits to same gender partners, most pension plans do not provide for the partners of retired employees. Surviving spouses of state employees are able to receive their spouse's pensions for the remainder of their life if they were legally married. By contrast surviving Gay & Lesbian spouses receive nothing in pension benefits from the state, even, if for example, the state employee was a police officer killed in the line of duty. The inevitable result of these two factors is financial insecurity unless the couple has far greater assets than the typical couple.
Marriage Rights Have Been a Struggle for Many Groups
Throughout history and even today marriage rights are an important issue for many peoples. In America marriage rights have often been limited or denied in order to discriminate against certain groups.
In America in many states, married women lost there right to contract and inherit and only men had the right to bring divorce proceedings. By the 1970s most of these inequalities had been addressed. It was not until 1967 that the Supreme Court finally struck down anti-miscegenation laws. Less well known is the fact that some states prohibited blacks and Asians from marrying at all.
Gay & Lesbian Couples and Marriage
While American social and civic institutions have an historical precedent of treating Gay & Lesbian couples less fairly, The Freedom To Marry Foundation of Massachusetts hopes to educate people on our fundamental right to form legally recognized families.
Discrimination against Gay & Lesbian couples in civil marriage unfairly denies gays and lesbians the rights and resources to secure and protect their families. It is time for equality for all Americans under the law.
Education campaigns and court cases are helping promote awareness of the issue and increasing the chances of changes in marriage laws in several states.
The Legal Struggle
Although no state has yet to legalize Gay & Lesbian marriage, substantial headway has been made as a result of a series of court challenges and victories in Alaska, Hawaii and most recently Vermont. While ballot initiatives have negated the immediate practical importance of the in Alaska and Hawaii victories, they have laid the foundation for the Vermont ruling and will hopefully serve as the basis for future rulings in other states.
In December 1999 the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that Gay & Lesbian couples were entitled to all the rights and benefits of marriage allowed under state law. The Court left it to the legislature to decide how to comply with the courts ruling. Rather than extend marriage rights to Gay & Lesbian couples the Vermont legislature created a parallel structure for same sex couples. This structure is known as Civil Unions. Civil Unions are not the same thing as marriage. They neither confer the hundreds of federal benefits associate with civil marriage and by not using the word marriage Gay & Lesbian couples are branded as something less than equal citizens. Nevertheless Civil Unions represented an enormous step forward.
You can learn more about Civil Unions at the website of Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders.
The question now is not whether marriage for same gender couples will become legal but rather what state will become the first to legalize marriage for gay couples.
In 1991, three couples sued the State of Hawaii for denying civil marriage licenses to them (Baehr v. Miike). On May 5, 1993, the Hawaii Supreme Court handed the gay and lesbian community what legal experts are calling our "biggest legal victory ever." This landmark ruling, known as Baehr v. Lewin, represents the first time in American legal history that any court has ruled in favor of the idea that it is discriminatory to deny gay men and lesbians the right to marry the partner of their choice. Thus, the door to legal marriage for same-gender couples has been opened, presenting the very real possibility that same-gender couples will finally be able to enjoy the same rights and benefits taken for granted by heterosexual couples.
On December 3, 1996, Circuit Judge Kevin Chang released his ruling in Baehr v. Miike. In it, Judge Chang ruled against the state of Hawaii on almost all counts. He rejected the idea that the state can be allowed to deny marriage licenses to Gay & Lesbian couples and ordered the state to pay the litigation costs to the plaintiffs. One day later, the judge stayed his decision, pending appeal to the Hawaii Supreme Court. A court in Alaska has also found that denying same gender couples a marriage license is discrimination based on gender.
We are optimistic about the future. Although our opponents have put significant resources into opposing equal marriage rights, with each passing day more and more people are discovering that same sex couples have the same aspirations and needs as families formed by opposite-sex couples. As with so many civil right struggles before, lack of familiarity and preconceived notions have slowed the pace of change. However, in recent years the dialogue that has been created by the court cases and even the passing of anti-gay legislation has sparked a vigorous debate. Today people are interested in learning about equal marriage for Gay & Lesbian families.
www.OutLesbian.com
www.Out-and-Proud.biz
www.MontanaLesbian.com
www.LesbianRealtor.net
Eric Minor, NEWS9 from the Web, October 6, 2006
CHARLESTON, W. Va. Oct. 5 -- It is a commercial that is hard to miss.It shows a traditional marriage ceremony in a church with a bride and a groom.But at the end, the bride’s veil is lifted to reveal a man’s face just before the couple lean in for a kiss.The real twist is that the ad calls for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. The advertisement ends with a voice-over narration: “Don't let liberal judges and homosexuals make a mockery of marriage.” The commercial has generated a strong response via calls and e-mails coming in to the NEWS9 newsroom. One viewer called to say he was “mortified.” Another was “disgusted” by the commercial. Some viewers saw no problem with the commercial or its message. “I do not believe men and men and women and women should be together,” one viewer told NEWS9.“I am 100 percent for banning gay marriage,” said another.The commercial was paid for by the West Virginia Family Foundation, a branch of the American Family Association.The ad is aimed at driving viewers to the Foundation’s Web site and to a petition calling for a state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage."If they wish, they may support marriage between one man and one woman and a state constitutional amendment,” said Foundation President Kevin McCoy. “We in no way promote a candidate or anything like that."McCoy told NEWS9 his group never intended to cause controversy with the advertisement.Andrew Schneider, the director of the West Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, disputed that claim and said the ad uses shock value to encourage discrimination. “They have the right to express their viewpoint,” said Schneider. “It’s unfortunate that their viewpoint is directed toward inflaming prejudices such as excluding certain individuals from marriage.”Six years ago, West Virginia lawmakers legally defined marriage as a legal union between one man and one woman. The West Virginia Family Foundation petition suggests a constitutional amendment would have a better chance of surviving legal challenges.
What is Legal Marriage?
Legal marriage is a civil contract established through a license issued by state governments in the United States of America.
Legal marriage, more commonly referred to as civil marriage, is a contract between two individuals and the state, which is recognized socially, legally and politically at all levels of society.
Civil marriage has no impact on a religious organization's autonomy. It is therefore important to differentiate between civil marriage and religious marriage. We will use the term married to refer to persons who have entered into a legally recognized civil marriage. No clergy member of faith tradition can be forced to perform or recognize a civil marriage. However the refusal of a clergy member or faith tradition to perform or recognize a marriage has no impact on the ability of a couple to enjoy the legal rights of their civil marriage.
For a more detailed exploration of the marriage issue, you may download a copy of the Marriage Fact Sheet produced by Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders. They also have other related publications.
Married couples are entitled to over 1,000 rights, benefits, privileges and responsibilities which are intended to foster the formation and stability of family, promote the well-being of children, if any, and ensure the rights of individuals when families are torn apart by death divorce, or serious illness.
A few examples may help you get a better understanding. In the event of death in a civil marriage, the surviving spouse has the automatic right to inherit even if there is no will. Gay & Lesbian couples cannot marry and do not have the automatic right to inherit their deceased spouses estate. Additionally, even if a surviving spouse in a Gay & Lesbian couple is protected by a will, there are a variety of tax issues that may result, for example, in the surviving Gay & lesbian spouse having to sell the house in which the couple lived for decades.
Another example is Social Security. Spouses of persons who have contributed to Social Security by paying FICA taxes are entitled to spousal and survivors benefits. Since same gender couples cannot get married, they are neither entitled to spousal benefits or survivors benefits even though they pay the same taxes. In addition, defined pension plans offered by employers provide benefits to the surviving spouse after the death of the retired worker. Although some companies have voluntarily extended similar benefits to same gender partners, most pension plans do not provide for the partners of retired employees. Surviving spouses of state employees are able to receive their spouse's pensions for the remainder of their life if they were legally married. By contrast surviving Gay & Lesbian spouses receive nothing in pension benefits from the state, even, if for example, the state employee was a police officer killed in the line of duty. The inevitable result of these two factors is financial insecurity unless the couple has far greater assets than the typical couple.
Marriage Rights Have Been a Struggle for Many Groups
Throughout history and even today marriage rights are an important issue for many peoples. In America marriage rights have often been limited or denied in order to discriminate against certain groups.
In America in many states, married women lost there right to contract and inherit and only men had the right to bring divorce proceedings. By the 1970s most of these inequalities had been addressed. It was not until 1967 that the Supreme Court finally struck down anti-miscegenation laws. Less well known is the fact that some states prohibited blacks and Asians from marrying at all.
Gay & Lesbian Couples and Marriage
While American social and civic institutions have an historical precedent of treating Gay & Lesbian couples less fairly, The Freedom To Marry Foundation of Massachusetts hopes to educate people on our fundamental right to form legally recognized families.
Discrimination against Gay & Lesbian couples in civil marriage unfairly denies gays and lesbians the rights and resources to secure and protect their families. It is time for equality for all Americans under the law.
Education campaigns and court cases are helping promote awareness of the issue and increasing the chances of changes in marriage laws in several states.
The Legal Struggle
Although no state has yet to legalize Gay & Lesbian marriage, substantial headway has been made as a result of a series of court challenges and victories in Alaska, Hawaii and most recently Vermont. While ballot initiatives have negated the immediate practical importance of the in Alaska and Hawaii victories, they have laid the foundation for the Vermont ruling and will hopefully serve as the basis for future rulings in other states.
In December 1999 the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that Gay & Lesbian couples were entitled to all the rights and benefits of marriage allowed under state law. The Court left it to the legislature to decide how to comply with the courts ruling. Rather than extend marriage rights to Gay & Lesbian couples the Vermont legislature created a parallel structure for same sex couples. This structure is known as Civil Unions. Civil Unions are not the same thing as marriage. They neither confer the hundreds of federal benefits associate with civil marriage and by not using the word marriage Gay & Lesbian couples are branded as something less than equal citizens. Nevertheless Civil Unions represented an enormous step forward.
You can learn more about Civil Unions at the website of Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders.
The question now is not whether marriage for same gender couples will become legal but rather what state will become the first to legalize marriage for gay couples.
In 1991, three couples sued the State of Hawaii for denying civil marriage licenses to them (Baehr v. Miike). On May 5, 1993, the Hawaii Supreme Court handed the gay and lesbian community what legal experts are calling our "biggest legal victory ever." This landmark ruling, known as Baehr v. Lewin, represents the first time in American legal history that any court has ruled in favor of the idea that it is discriminatory to deny gay men and lesbians the right to marry the partner of their choice. Thus, the door to legal marriage for same-gender couples has been opened, presenting the very real possibility that same-gender couples will finally be able to enjoy the same rights and benefits taken for granted by heterosexual couples.
On December 3, 1996, Circuit Judge Kevin Chang released his ruling in Baehr v. Miike. In it, Judge Chang ruled against the state of Hawaii on almost all counts. He rejected the idea that the state can be allowed to deny marriage licenses to Gay & Lesbian couples and ordered the state to pay the litigation costs to the plaintiffs. One day later, the judge stayed his decision, pending appeal to the Hawaii Supreme Court. A court in Alaska has also found that denying same gender couples a marriage license is discrimination based on gender.
We are optimistic about the future. Although our opponents have put significant resources into opposing equal marriage rights, with each passing day more and more people are discovering that same sex couples have the same aspirations and needs as families formed by opposite-sex couples. As with so many civil right struggles before, lack of familiarity and preconceived notions have slowed the pace of change. However, in recent years the dialogue that has been created by the court cases and even the passing of anti-gay legislation has sparked a vigorous debate. Today people are interested in learning about equal marriage for Gay & Lesbian families.
www.OutLesbian.com
www.Out-and-Proud.biz
www.MontanaLesbian.com
www.LesbianRealtor.net
2 comments:
i honestly dont understand why gay marriage is banned from so many states..the way i see it you cant help who you love. the thing with same sex marriages isnt diffrent at all. they deny our rights as citizens i mean they mine as well call us immigrants because they treat us like were diffrent. we just cant help who we love. i dont understand how they will let a man change his sex and still be with a man to get married or a female changing her sex to male and being with another female i mean are they going to take that away from people to.
To make public our private marriage of 36 years, Cindy and I were married June 21, 2006 in Vancouver, BC, Canada.
It was beautiful to say publicly and legally my commitment to the love of my life.
Terri L. Miller, Ed.D.
Post a Comment