Gay rights have come a long way in the United States. Just 50 years ago, same-sex relations were against the law. Just three months ago, in June, the Supreme Court ruled that gay marriage was legal in all 50 states. The majority of the media says that the ruling is a huge step forward for human rights, but there are some that do not. People who are opposed to the ruling do not seem to get as much of a voice as the people who are for the ruling.
Many people who do not agree with the ruling come from religious backgrounds and have Biblical-based morals. Most of the time, these people are painted as hateful and ignorant by the media, but that is not always the case.
“I wasn’t surprised,” said Mr. Ronald White, attorney and President of the La Verne Stake for The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, when asked about his initial thoughts when he first heard the ruling. Before the ruling, 32 states defined marriage between a man and a woman, but the Supreme Court ruled that all same-sex couples should be recognized as a union in every state. Mr. White said, “It was a sad day when five jurors can make such a big impact and change American life.”
When asked about how the ruling will affect the people of the church, Mr. White said, “It’s causing concern in the church, but we still love and accept homosexuals. We’ll love people no matter who they are. Just because you believe in traditional marriage doesn’t mean you hate homosexuals. The media’s views on religious morals reflect an easy way to attack or oppose people who don’t agree with the majority of people.”
The reason for most of the outrage in some churches now is because of the way that the whole conflict was handled. “The Supreme Court’s job is to interpret laws, not create laws. There was not a lot of legal input in the ruling,” Mr. White said. This is why the church is outraged, not because of “homophobic views” that most people assume they have.
Mr. White shared opinions with Supreme Court Justices who voted against same-sex marriage. Chief Justice Roberts wrote one of the dissenting opinions, and he wrote, “Celebrate the opportunity for a new expression of commitment to a partner. Celebrate the availability of new benefits. But do not celebrate the Constitution. It had nothing to do with it.” Chief Justice Clarence Thomas wrote, “The Court’s decision today is at odds not only with the Constitution, but with the principles upon which our Nation was built.”
When asked about how this will affect society in the future, Mr. White talked about how there may be consequences in the future. “This is a great victory for those in favor, but later on things may change.” The next ruling may not favor their views. The ruling may have additional effects on society in the future if the Supreme Court Justices again act outside the bounds of their authority.
Mr. White said that people will just have to “agree to disagree” on the issue for the time being.
–William Foreman
10 Comments
Yes, the Supreme Court’s decision did not please everyone, for sure. But it did stop folks from using religion and tradition as a reason for denying other folks the basic civil right of choosing their life partner in civil marriage. Religious beliefs must be protected as a civil right for those who choose to practice those beliefs, but personal religious beliefs should not limit anyone else’s own civil right to marriage. Religious folks have all the same rights and protections that they have always had, and now, so do the innocent folks who are born gay.
“Religious beliefs must be protected as a civil right for those who choose to practice those beliefs, but personal religious beliefs should not limit anyone else’s own civil right to marriage.”
Even before the Supreme Court’s ruling, the rights and restrictions regarding marriage applied equally to every individual, regardless of their sexual orientation as everyone had an equal right to become one half of a married couple. Thus no individual’s right to enter marriage was more or less limited than anyone else’s. In the final analysis, this issue has never been about rights, it’s been about definitions. Who has a right to enter marriage has not changed. What has changed is the definition of “married couple”.
Correction. The role of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution of the United States and adjudicate whether laws are in line or violate it. BIG difference!
That’s exactly what was done. Laws restricting same sex marriage were found to be unconstitutional, and were struck from law as a result.
Thomas Jefferson said: “I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.”
The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution to mean that we all get the equal opportunity to fulfill our basic rights.
There is no reason in the cosmos to oppose same-sex marriage. Hurts no-one, helps many.
“The Supreme Court interprets the Constitution to mean that we all get the equal opportunity to fulfill our basic rights.”
Before this latest Supreme Court ruling, which rights and restrictions regarding marriage were not applied in exactly the same way to homosexual individuals as they were to heterosexual individuals. If memory serves, all individuals, regardless of their orientation had an equal right to become one-half of a married couple
WRONG 32 states did not define marriage and between a man and a woman. Thirty seven states did recognize the right for same sex couples to marry.
“32 states did not define marriage and between a man and a woman.”
Then how did they define it?
37 states made same sex marriage legal
Whoa…this was not just five SCOTUS judges making this decision. There were thousands of jurists involved in this debate which brought rulings in most states. The SCOTUS just confirmed those opinions and the laws which jurists base opinions on. People who oppose this ruling had their day(s) in courts across this country. And the outcome of those days(s) were they had nothing…nothing to argue on their side except their bible and their interpretation of what marriage should be. Well they lost and now they are just going to cry like little babies. Well my advice is “buck up”..the world will go on and you can still believe whatever you want in your home and house of worship. But in the public square we continue to be equal.