One of the more interesting aspects of the gay marriage debate that the arguments of the last two days have highlighted is how different the discussion of marriage is from the religious to the legal realm. Religion was not mentioned one time over the course of the two days and neither should it have been. The issues of the extension of civil marriage are not issues of theology or spirituality (and they still won’t be if same-sex marriage became legal nationwide tomorrow).
By Jason Hines – Today was a landmark day for the Supreme Court, as it heard arguments on the constitutionality of Proposition 8. I have written about this case at every level (on the state level and at the 9th Cir.) so it only seems right that I talk about the arguments that took place earlier today. However, it doesn’t make sense to give a straight up and down summary or even a major analysis (there are plenty of people who did a good job of that, including this article by Adam Serwer), but there are some things that I want to highlight. Some will be important, some won’t, but these are the things that came to mind as I listened to the oral arguments –
Once again making the same tactical mistakes that were made in the lower courts, the Proposition 8 advocate failed to make an argument that would pass the muster of the “rational basis” test required before rights can be denied, and lost any ability to frame the debate.
On Friday, March 22, Kentucky Governor Steve Beshear (D) vetoed a religious freedom Bill (HB 279) claiming that the bill would “cause serious unintentional consequences that could threaten public safety, health care, and individuals’ civil rights.” The legislature is expected to override the veto.
In response to a state Supreme Court decision upholding incarceration of an Amish group for refusing for religious reasons to install orange triangles on their buggies, the Kentucky Legislature has, by a veto proof margin, passed a measure (HB 279) which is designed to prevent the government from substantially burdening an individual’s freedom of religion.
The U.S. Supreme Court has scheduled two days of oral arguments on two separate but related cases beginning on March 26, 2013. The Court will be hearing arguments on California’s Proposition 8 which amended the state constitution to disallow same-sex marriage is constitutional and the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).
On September 17, 1787, the Constitution of the United States was signed by thirty-nine men who changed the course of history. This year as we celebrate the 225th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution, we reflect on the impact this document has made on societies around the world. I would like to thank…
Many conservatives have eviscerated Obamacare, arguing that it would “raise premiums, unconstitutionally force people to buy health care, cause the deficit to skyrocket, slash Medicare spending to create a new entitlement, cause rationing, cause a significant number of doctors to leave the practice, and destroy the quality of American healthcare. Although I am a lifelong Republican, I must respectfully disagree with my conservative brethren on many of these points.
By Nicholas P. Miller – It is time to examine a position that provides a principled freedom, both religious and civil, the possibility of a public morality, and a common language with which to discuss and debate the issues. [dc]T[/dc]he recent presidential campaign has broken out into a disorienting game of religious liberty musical chairs; Catholic…
Remarks of President Ronald Reagan on the 200th anniversary of Signing of the the U.S. Constitution on September 18, 1987. [dc]A[/dc]s we stand here today before Independence Hall, we can easily imagine that day, Sept. 17, 1787, when the delegates rose from their chairs and arranged themselves according to the geography of their states, beginning…