Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
SCOTUS has ruled Marriage is a Fundamental Right.Married couples have 1,138 federal rights, protections and responsibilities such as:
- Social Security benefits upon death, disability or retirement of spouse, as well as benefits for minor children.
- Family and Medical Leave protections to care for a new child or a sick or injured family member
- Workers' Compensation protections for the family of a worker injured on the job
- Access to COBRA insurance benefits so the family doesn't lose health insurance when one spouse is laid off
- ERISA (Employee Retirement Income Security Act) protections such as the ability to leave a pension, other than Social Security, to your spouse
- Exemptions from penalties on IRA and pension rollovers
- Exemptions from estate taxes when a spouse dies
- Exemptions from federal income taxes on spouse's health insurance
- The right to visit a sick or injured loved one, have a say in life and death matters during hospitalization. LINK
I suspect you knew this though.
Those are not rights. What is wrong with you people who argue stuff and you don't even know the definition of rights? Here is a very, very easy challenge for you. Show me where heterosexual marriage is defined as a right. Show me where a right requires a license.
What you side is doing with the wrong use of the word right is being disingenuous. You want it to be a right then there can be no argument against. But marriage IS NOT A
RIGHT.
Liberals are like a poker player who ever so often reaches over to the person next to him and takes chips because it isn't fair that the other player is a better poker player.
Usmb should create a "homo board" to discuss gay issues. Quite frankly I am tired of the subject.
You know what I do when there are dozens of threads on subjects I have no interest in? I don't click on them and comment in them.
But you still have to sort through them to find the ones that are relevant.
Courtesy....like not having this in a Gay Parade......
Wildest Gay Pride Parade Pictures - chicagotribune.com
Yeah...not only going to have a parade...but piss you off in the process.
Nope, no Wills. Don't need them in my case. That Marriage License from the state gives me all the access I need to her estate should she die. Pretty powerful eh? And I got it, from the State for $25, and they call it a Marriage License. Now wouldn't that be a nice thing to offer to any other two adults who wanted such a thing? That seems fair right?My wife and I have this odd little document from the state, it's a contract actually, signed by a judge. It says, Marriage License. See the problem now?
Which means what? You have a piece of paper? Big deal. Do you rely on that paper to take care of your wife after your passing or do you have other legal documents such as a will?
Except states cannot override fundamental rights.
Except states cannot override fundamental rights.
Jezzez Cripes. You skipped over the posts that showed you -- just to make a fool of yourself again?Except states cannot override fundamental rights.
Where is marriage spelled out as a fundamental right? You are just repeating words from you democrat hand book.
Except states cannot override fundamental rights.
Where is marriage spelled out as a fundamental right? You are just repeating words from you democrat hand book.
Yes, the Judicial goes against the "will of the people" when the people's will violates the US Constitution. Need an example?
Any idea when Loving v Virginia was decided? Look LOW on the graph...
WTF does that have to do with law? So what if people didn't think interracial marriage was right? And what the hell does interracial marriage has to do with gay marriage? I wonder how blacks feel about such comparisons. You do realize that when the percentage is 4 percent that is pretty much everyone, black white, liberal conservative.
Where in the US constitution do you find the right of marriage? You don't it ain't a right.
You were the one just sniveling about the tyranny of activist judges going against "the will of the people" were you not? The SCOTUS went against the "will of the people" in Loving v Virginia...by a large margin. Less than 20% of the nation approved of relationships between blacks and whites when the SCOTUS declared marriage a fundamental right. Look it up!
It is well-established and crystal clear that the right to marry is a central aspect of the right to liberty, privacy, association, and identity.
Fourteen times since 1888, the United States Supreme Court has stated that marriage is a fundamental right of all individuals. In these cases, the Court has reaffirmed that “freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage” is “one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause,” “essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men,” and “sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
Here is a list of the fourteen cases, with links to the opinions and citations to the Court’s discussion of the right to marry.
- Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 205, 211 (1888): Marriage is “the most important relation in life” and “the foundation of the family and society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.”
- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923): The right “to marry, establish a home and bring up children” is a central part of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
- Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942): Marriage “one of the basic civil rights of man,” “fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.”
- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965): “We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rights—older than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.”
- Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967): “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”
- Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 376, 383 (1971): “[M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society” and is “a fundamental human relationship.”
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974): “This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
- Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977) (plurality): “[W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.”
- Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977): “t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.”
[*]Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978): “[T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.”
[*]Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987): “[T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right” and an “expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment.”
[*]Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992): “These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.”
[*]M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116 (1996): “Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as ‘of basic importance in our society,’ rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the State’s unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.”
[*]Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 574 (2003): “[O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education. … Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.”
14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right | American Foundation for Equal Rights
Except states cannot override fundamental rights.
Where is marriage spelled out as a fundamental right? You are just repeating words from you democrat hand book.
The fact that it isn't spelled out as a fundamental right as a union between a man and a woman is the issue.
Usmb should create a "homo board" to discuss gay issues. Quite frankly I am tired of the subject.
You know what I do when there are dozens of threads on subjects I have no interest in? I don't click on them and comment in them.
Wow.WTF does that have to do with law? So what if people didn't think interracial marriage was right? And what the hell does interracial marriage has to do with gay marriage? I wonder how blacks feel about such comparisons. You do realize that when the percentage is 4 percent that is pretty much everyone, black white, liberal conservative.
Where in the US constitution do you find the right of marriage? You don't it ain't a right.
You were the one just sniveling about the tyranny of activist judges going against "the will of the people" were you not? The SCOTUS went against the "will of the people" in Loving v Virginia...by a large margin. Less than 20% of the nation approved of relationships between blacks and whites when the SCOTUS declared marriage a fundamental right. Look it up!
Do you understand the difference between approving and making it law to force people to accept something? I don't approve of homosexual sodomy but I am not for laws that keep someone from being a butt pirate. I am also not for laws that say I have to accept the practice. I am not for forcing religion on you but apparently you have no problem forcing yours on everyone else.
The SCOTUS has made many a bad decision. The Dred Scott case being one, Roe vs Wade another and maybe the Loving decision.
Punished huh? Tell us, do you get a marriage license at a church?Gay "Marriage" is nothing more than trying to punish the church by using a word.
Other than that it is all smoke and mirrors.
Well of course there is the money aspect to grab their partners Social Security after they die.
Here's some more -- Chew on this:
14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right | American Foundation for Equal Rights
It is well-established and crystal clear that the right to marry is a central aspect of the right to liberty, privacy, association, and identity.
Fourteen times since 1888, the United States Supreme Court has stated that marriage is a fundamental right of all individuals. In these cases, the Court has reaffirmed that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause, essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men, and sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the States unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.
Here is a list of the fourteen cases, with links to the opinions and citations to the Courts discussion of the right to marry.
- Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190, 205, 211 (1888): Marriage is the most important relation in life and the foundation of the family and society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress.
- Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399 (1923): The right to marry, establish a home and bring up children is a central part of liberty protected by the Due Process Clause.
- Skinner v. Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942): Marriage one of the basic civil rights of man, fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.
- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479, 486 (1965): We deal with a right of privacy older than the Bill of Rightsolder than our political parties, older than our school system. Marriage is a coming together for better or for worse, hopefully enduring, and intimate to the degree of being sacred. It is an association that promotes a way of life, not causes; a harmony in living, not political faiths; a bilateral loyalty, not commercial or social projects. Yet it is an association for as noble a purpose as any involved in our prior decisions.
- Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1, 12 (1967): The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.
- Boddie v. Connecticut, 401 U.S. 371, 376, 383 (1971): [M]arriage involves interests of basic importance to our society and is a fundamental human relationship.
- Cleveland Board of Education v. LaFleur, 414 U.S. 632, 639-40 (1974): This Court has long recognized that freedom of personal choice in matters of marriage and family life is one of the liberties protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.
- Moore v. City of East Cleveland, 431 U.S. 494, 499 (1977) (plurality): [W]hen the government intrudes on choices concerning family living arrangements, this Court must examine carefully the importance of the governmental interests advanced and the extent to which they are served by the challenged regulation.
- Carey v. Population Services International, 431 U.S. 678, 684-85 (1977): t is clear that among the decisions that an individual may make without unjustified government interference are personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and child rearing and education.
[*]Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374, 384 (1978): [T]he right to marry is of fundamental importance for all individuals.
[*]Turner v. Safley, 482 U.S. 78, 95 (1987): [T]he decision to marry is a fundamental right and an expression[ ] of emotional support and public commitment.
[*]Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 851 (1992): These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment. At the heart of liberty is the right to define ones own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.
[*]M.L.B. v. S.L.J., 519 U.S. 102, 116 (1996): Choices about marriage, family life, and the upbringing of children are among associational rights this Court has ranked as of basic importance in our society, rights sheltered by the Fourteenth Amendment against the States unwarranted usurpation, disregard, or disrespect.
[*]Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 574 (2003): [O]ur laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, and education. Persons in a homosexual relationship may seek autonomy for these purposes, just as heterosexual persons do.
14 Supreme Court Cases: Marriage is a Fundamental Right | American Foundation for Equal Rights
Where is marriage spelled out as a fundamental right? You are just repeating words from you democrat hand book.
The fact that it isn't spelled out as a fundamental right as a union between a man and a woman is the issue.
Exactly my point. Heterosexual marriage is not a right thus the states should be able to regulate the institution of marriage. Much like they do drivers license. Driving isn't a right and neither is marriage. We are bastardizing the word right.
