Gay marriage and Abortion are hot button issues right now in the Federal Government. In my readings of the Constitution there is no provision that says the Federal Government has the power to legislate on any of that.- Gruntpain1775
Now since they don't have the authority to do this it falls to the state or to the people. So, if state A says abortion or Gay Marriage is outlawed and is said so in their constitution, then it is. If state B is silent, then it is up to the people.
So why do we have a marriage license? This came about 1923 with the Uniform Marriage and Marriage License Act. Why was this created? Well, Historically interracial marriages were prohibited. After the passage of the 15th Amendment and the Civil War you really couldn't out right make a law that said a black man couldn't marry a white woman. So they created this law, and it placed an unsaid "authority" to the issuing authority to not issue a license to a interracial couple. So, in a sense, it was a raciest law and still is.
This links to gay rights the same way. I think the gay community is going about the "gay rights" issue the wrong way. First, gay people have no more or less than anyone else. What they should be advocating for, as well as everyone else, is the abolishment of the Marriage License. It is unconstitutional. A marriage is between 2 people (or more) and if they have a god(s) then them as well.
This goes directly to the State rights issue. The Federal Government makes plenty of laws that are unconstitutional, and some are made to correct a problem or prevent something. If it were left to a state and state rights, the issue will correct itself.
Take child porn for example, it's illegal in all 50 states. So why the need for a Federal law? If one state allowed it the people there would change it, and if not they would move to a state that outlawed it. Eventually that state would change when enough people "vote with their feet". Replace Child porn with any other topic and the outcome would be the same.
But the Federal Government meddles with State affairs. Take the banning of gay marriage in California. The people voted for outlawing it, A Federal judge shot it down. That's a whole other discussion on Federal Judges and them being to powerful and overstepping their bounds. But the judge struck down the will of the people there, and it was an issue that the Federal Government can not legislate on anyway.
Recently we are seeing the States rights issue come to the front again. Arizona is an example. The immigration issue is one that is heated now. The Federal Government is charged with that issue, but AZ is looking at it as the USG is not dealing with it, so they are in a sense succeeding that power away from the USG and back to themselves.
Immigration, Drugs, Gay rights, Obamacare, etc...all states issues but the state has no voice in it. They have no voice because with the 17th Amendment allows for the direct election senators. They have no voice in the Federal system anymore. The way it was originally set up gave a voice to the people (the house, and the purse holder..thus ensuring the will of the people are always the most powerful) and the voice of the State, the Senate.
Wednesday, April 13, 2011
A colleague at Lightfighter.net puts the states rights argument into current context....and does an admirable job of it.