Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Editorial

Remember when segregation was demolished? How about when women were finally treated as equals to men? Yet another equality issue has sparked in our nation today, Homosexual couples are being denied the same rights that Heterosexual couples are granted. As of right now same sex marriage is only legal in select states. These states are Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Iowa and Vermont, as well as the District of Columbia. This is a very small number of states that have legalized marriage and in the future I would like to see the rest of our nation legalize same sex marriage. Equality plays a role in this situation, along with rights being denied. As does religion, and the economy. Since the mid1900’s, certain groups have been fighting for equality. As our society progresses the fight for same sex marriage is hoped to grow stronger. Our country has overcome discriminating against a certain group of people, and same sex couples are no different. Our country needs to stop discriminating and same sex marriage needs o be nationally legalized.

            In the 1900’s through the 1920’s women fought for their right to vote, and eventually they were granted their right. In the 1950’s to the 1960’s the Civil Rights Movement took place, segregation was overturned and differences in skin color didn’t affect where you could sit, where you could eat, or even where you could get a drink of water. Now, Homosexual couples are being denied their right to marry, which in turn, denies them of other federal rights that are guaranteed with marriage. These rights are mainly related to money… but one of the major differences between marriage and a civil union, which is the highest form of relation in most states for homosexual couples, is that if one of the women or men was to need hospital attention and cannot make decision for themselves, their partner cannot make any of those decision for them. The hospital would have to go through that person family when the partner may be sitting right in the hospital. In a “marriage” the spouse can make any of those decisions for the other spouse. "Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This section of Article 14 of the American Constitution states that every person is given equal protection of the laws. This shows that same sex couples should be granted the same right to marry as Heterosexual couples. Religion is another large factor in this situation, but in many people’s opinion, it should not be.

            In the US we do not have a nationwide religion, and many peoples opinion this means that we cannot base decisions in court n religious values. “You can’t base a law on religion alone.” State Tom Little at CVU Panel Day.  David Zuckerman, also a CVU Panelist, mentioned that there are different religions. If there are different religions, then we cannot base one religion’s beliefs on a law. Maryanne Hageman, a Mormon Panelist at CVU Panel Day, mentioned the separation of church and state and that it was a personal decision if you were in favor of or against same sex marriage based on your religious beliefs, but she also believed that church and state should remain separate, and religious values should not be used in a court of law. Along with the fact that we do not have a nationwide religion, religious values of Christianity, or any other religion cannot decide whether or not same sex marriage should be legal in a state or not. Another interesting reason that same sex marriage should be legalized is because of the economy.

            Marriages and weddings bring in a lot of money. Legalizing same sex marriage would further increase that amount of money. During an Interview with my neighbors Susan Diane, a same sex married couple, Diane brought up this interesting point that I would have never even thought of if she hadn’t mentioned it. When you think of a wedding, what do you think of? Is it simple, or extravagant? Whatever it is you thought of, it most definitely cost the families and the couple a lot of money. This money will help the economy of any state that the wedding is in. As Diane also pointed out in the interview more people are coming to Vermont and also the other states that same sex marriage is legalized in to get married. Additional weddings in states would be a great source of income for states; this is yet another reason showing that same sex marriage will not affect a state negatively.

            The Civil Rights Movement, the Suffrage. These are two great examples of how our nation has overcome discrimination and has moved forward. As of now, five states have legalized same sex marriage, along with the District of Columbia. A select few allow civil unions. This number needs to be increased to all fifty states allowing same sex marriage. Not allowing same sex couples to marry is a form of discrimination. By not being allowed to marry, same sex couples are being denied federal rights and protections. Most of these rights are related to money, some are related to health care, amongst other things. Religion is among the defenses of the groups who are not in support of same sex marriage. The United States of America do not have a nationwide religion; therefore defending Heterosexual marriage with religion does not make any sense. Religion cannot be the only defense in a court of law, there needs to be a separation of church and state. Lastly, the economy would boom with the marriages that would occur if same sex marriage was legalized. Weddings would be happening in all the states for the same sex couples that have been waiting to be married. Same sex couples deserve the right to be married, and our country needs to stop discriminating against them. Homosexual marriage needs to be nationally legalized for the discrimination to stop. 

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

The Trevor Project: It Gets Better

Issue Explanation

In the United States marriage laws are based on state laws, not federal laws. This issue can be explained simply as same sex couples acting on their right of The Pursuit of Happiness, Diversity, and Equality... and others feeling that same sex marriages will change the definition of marriage and that same sex couples should not have this right.

"Opposing Viewpoints"

Current Interpretation

Same-sex marriage is current legal in the states of Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Iowa and Vermont, as well as the District of Columbia. Marriage Laws are part of the State Laws, not Federal Laws.
During the year of 2004 in California more than 2,000 marriage licenses were given to same sex couples. Then in 2005 these licenses were deemed invalid. California passed a bill legalizing same sex marriage, but then governor Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill and in 2008 California deemed that the  definition of marriage as "a union between a man and a woman." was unconstitutional and must "be stricken from the statute" at this time same sex couples had the same marriage rights ans heterosexual couples. at the same time however proposition 8 was being launched. Proposition 8 was meant to deny same sex couples the marriage rights that heterosexual couples have.  "On June 16, 2008, California began allowing same-sex couples to receive marriage licenses. But on November 4 of that year, Proposition 8 passed, again banning same-sex marriage." A similar story occurred in Maine in 2009. 



"Opposing Viewpoints"








"NPR: State By State: The Legal Battle Over Gay Marriage "

Constitutional Connection

Preamble: "We the people of the United States... secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity" This section of the Constitution states that every citizen of the United States has the right to liberty. This shows that same sex couples should be free to marry. 

14th Amendment: "Nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor deny to any person withing its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." This shows that states can not deny same sex couples their liberty... therefor they can not deny them the right to marry. This also states that there should be equal protection of the laws: equality. 

Article 4, Section 1: "States must honor the laws, records, and court decisions of the other states. Regarding judicial proceedings, there are two exceptions:(1) one sates dies not have to enforce another states criminal code, and (2) one state does not have have to recognize another state's grant of a divorce if legitimate residence was not established by the person obtaining the divorce." This part of the Constitution: The Full Faith Act, shows that all states must honor a marriage license given to a same sex couple in another state.

Court Cases

Case #1: Goodridge vs. Department of HealthGoodridge sued the Department of Health.


At this link there is a descriptive visual of the case.
7 same-sex couples filed suit against the Department of Health in Massachusetts because they were all denied marriage licenses for being gay or lesbian. The MA Supreme Court ruled in favor of the 7 same- sex couples. The lasting affects of the case are that now same- sex marriage is legal in MA. 


Case #2: Lawrence vs. Texas 
John Lawrence and Tyron Garner were arrested in 1998 for engaging in sexual intercourse in Lawrence's home. John Lawrence along with Lambda Legal battled against the courts in Texas to over turn the "Homosexual Conduct" law in Texas which states that two people of the same sex can not partake in sexual intimacy. Eventually the U.S. Supreme Court deemed the "Homosexual Conduct" law unconstitutional, giving same- sex couples the same rights to sexual intimacy as heterosexual couples. This was the first case to give homosexual couples any sort of rights.


Case #3: Baker vs. State
Baker presented the question could "the State of Vermont exclude same-sex couples from the benefits and protections that its laws provide to opposite- sex couples?" And from this court case, and this question the Civil  Union Bill was passed. This relates to Goodridge vs. The Department of Public Heath of MA because having civil unions lead to same-sex couples being able to get married... This case was the first Civil Union case to pass. 

Stake Holders


In Favor:
There are many groups in favor of legalizing same sex marriage. There are many reasons for this, some of which are people in favor are same-sex couples, or they are homosexual. Another large reason is they believe in equality for all people. Vermont Freedom to Marry is a great example of an organization that is in favor of same sex marriage. They believe in equality for all people, and work to eliminate discrimination against homosexual couples. Some of the issues they work with are answering questions around same-sex marrying in Vermont, financial and tax issues, and family and child custody concerns. Vermont Freedom to Marry is a nonprofit organization working in favor of same sex marriage. 


Against:
One of the groups against same sex marriage is the National Organization for Marriage, or NOM. NOM is also a nonprofit organization that works to "protect marriage and the faith communities that sustain it.  NOM was founded in 2007 when there was a need for groups in opposition of same-sex marriage. At the moment they are working on influencing and creating strategies in the Northeast, and the West Coast, where "marriage is most under threat."

My Interviews

Interview Number 1: Diane and Susan: Same Sex Married Couple:

During my interview with Diane and Susan I learned a lot about the topic from the perspective of a same sex married couple. One of the most interesting things that was brought up was the factor of the economy's relationship to this subject. By this I mean that weddings bring in a lot of money to a state, and this could affect a states decision to legalize same sex marriage. What I also found interesting during this interview was Diane and Susan's different views on marriage. Diane wanted to make a statement with her marriage, because she didn't want to just fall into the same category as opposite sex married couples. Susan wanted a traditional marriage because of where she grew up... so at their wedding they had to discuss every single detail on how to make it traditional, while also making a statement.This was very interesting to listen to  
This interview most definitely not hard to do. The hardest part I have to say was taking the notes, because everything was happening so fast. It wasn't so much an interview, but more like a conversation, it was nice to just generally discuss with them about how they feel. They told many stories about the difficulties of transitioning. It really was not a hard thing to do, and it was also comforting knowing that I was talking to someone that I knew.

Interview Number 2: Mary Abele: Pastor


In my interview with Mary Abele I learned about her view on same sex marriage, which is that if two people love each other then people need to honor that. I also learned about how she and the All Souls Interfaith Gathering are starting a new way of contacting with the divine which is called interfaith... In her words in Interfaith, you find your own way of contacting the divine... and you use that belief system. This was interesting to hear about, and I most certainly agreed with her statement about honoring  two peoples love.

The most difficult part of this interview was finding a time that worked for both myself and Mary. We kept both having plans or prior commitments when the other was free. We finally found a good time for an interview and it was good to get to ask her a couple of questions. 

Interviews

Potential Number 1: 
Sheryl Rapée-Adams
Email: Sheryl@vtfreetomarry.org
Cell Phone: 802-353-7286

Potential Number 2:
Beth Robinson802-388-6356
Beth Robison


Potential Number 3: 
Susan and Diane 
Home Phone: 802-985-5491

Panel Day Reflection

On panel day I heard a lot of different perspectives on the topic. It was interestion to see the three different views. My opinion of them varies, I was very happy with David Zuckerman's view point. He gave his opinions on everything, and I was happy to see that we share the same feelings toward the topic. It was very interesting to hear what he had to say. I especially liked his story about how children affected decisions.  To me it really showed how times are changing with the generations. I also really liked how he said that my generation either doesn't care or is in support, because this really does she a change from other generations. Tom Little was a little confusing for me because he did not really show his personal opinion on the subject, more he showed his legal standpoint. It was interesting to hear more about this topic legally, I just wish I could have heard more of his personal opinion. MaryAnne Hegeman was again very interesting to listen to. Her opinions were very religiously based, and it was interesting to hear someones opinion coming from that angle.... over all panel day was an interesting experience, and it gave me some great information. 

My Current Understanding

     It is to my current understanding that my topic is about the right to marry. I am exploring and researching cases and the constitution to discover what it says about homosexual marriage. There is a focus case, and I am looking at what the "legal" definition of marriage is, and what the focus case proposed.

     I am still confused by what we do at the "end" of trial search. Also in my group at the kickoff, we didn't really learn which amendment my topic should be researched within... this is making it hard for research. What happens during trial search? What do we really do... I also am still unsure of how to start doing the great amount of research...