Should the federal constitution, not the states, decide who has a right to marry?

  • Yes it should

    The 14th Amendment's equal protection clause means that the laws of the nation must apply equally to all, and based on Supreme Court cases like Loving v. Virginia, it's clear that marriage is a federal issue that should be addressed on the federal level, whether it's the Supreme Court, an act of Congress, or a constitutional amendment.

  • Yes they should.

    This is a very tricky question, but I chose yes. I think that the federal constitution should determine who has a right to marry over the states. I am very much for marriage equality and think that this would be a surefire way to ensure everyone has the same rights when it comes to marriage.

  • Yes, it should.

    Yes, I believe the federal constitution, not the states, should decide who has a right to marry. In the United States, the federal constitution is the law of the land and has jurisdiction over the states. If it becomes a federal law, then it must be recognized in all states.

  • more power to the states

    Why is it every time there is an issue, we have to let the federal government deal with it. The states should have the ability to deal with the issue by what their people want. States should have the right to choose some of the laws made in this country, it should not just be the federal government.

  • Abuse of position

    You argue that the Courts should be making laws that don't have majority support, just due to a lawyer convincing a court. You completely misunderstand democracy. Which is what the majority says goes. In California, the majority of the population don't want gay marriage and even a popular vote refused it. This indicates that most Americans don't approve of it. The only states that allow it, are ones where either the courts or the legislature have voted. If the people voted, as in California, then the results would hopefully tell you that democracy has prevailed in the face of minority rule. The left, abuses democracy, by using the courts to pass majority unpopular laws, and slowly chips at free speech with anti hate speech laws.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.