The Vote for Gay Marriage

The Supreme Court having passed by minimal majority of 5-4, has declared that same sex marriage should be constitutionally legal. Each of the 4 opposing justices in an unusual step, wrote these separate opinions.

Justice Roberts: “The majority’s decision is an act of will, not legal judgment. The right it announces has no basis in the Constitution or this court’s precedent.” “Five lawyers have closed the debate and enacted their own vision of marriage as a matter of constitutional law.”

Justice Scalia: characterized the decision as a “threat to American democracy,” “hubris” and a “judicial putsch.”

Justice Thomas wrote that the decision means that conflict between the recognition of same-sex “marriage” and religious liberty appears “all but inevitable,” as individuals and churches face demands to participate in and endorse these marriages. The use of the judicial process “short-circuits” the political process that could consider religious-freedom implications, “with potentially ruinous consequences for religious liberty.”

Finally Justice Alito said, the decision “will be used to vilify (embarrass) Americans who are unwilling to assent to the new orthodoxy.”

Read more: http://www.ncregister.com/daily-news/breaking-u.s.-supreme-court-legalizes-same-sex-marriage/

As Americans we ponder the effect of this decision on our personal lives. Many of us have the ho-hum attitude that these decisions will have little or no effect on us. But in this case it is clearly reflected by 4 of the 9 justices, that all Americans will in some way feel the effect of this decision.

 

Justice Voted Appointed By  President’s Party
Roberts Against G. W. Bush Republican
Scalia Against Reagan Republican
Thomas Against G. H. W. Bush Republican
Alito Against G. W. Bush Republican
Kennedy In Favor Reagan Republican
Kagan In Favor Obama Democrat
Breyer In Favor Clinton Democrat
Ginsburg In Favor Clinton Democrat
Sotomayor In Favor Obama Democrat

 

Reference Websites

Recent Comments

  1. Comments or Questions here.

2 Comments

  1. Leo Eugene Trimmer
    July 2, 2015

    I believe that the decision to allow this type of marriage was not in accordance with the constitutional provision to keep church and state separate. It, the court, has over ridden that provision and should have left it to the church and the individual. God’s law should be followed by everyone of us, as God instructed this type of union is sinful, an abomination to Him and to His followers, regardless their denomination. Sex of a homosexual type is wrong not only in His eyes, but should be in the eyes of all mankind. Other counties as well as the majority of our population in America see this as wrong and that will affect every foreign policy we (America) tries to achieve.

    • January 19, 2016

      I have to agree. This decision we have already seen, opens a Pandora’s box. Already There is a case in Ohio where a father and son want to marry. Much more to follow.

Comments are closed.