|
Find out more about Jim: I am a retired New York attorney, a retired Florida Department of Revenue employee with an interest in and fascination with all matters political and bizarre – often the same thing. Florida is a fertile source of both. |
Like so many issues in political discourse, there is the matter of terminology to be resolved.
The term “same-sex” marriage relates to marriage between same-sex couples and civil unions – not quite the legal equivalent to marriage. Moreover, when a candidate is asked his or her opinion, they may be speaking of morality and their religious opinions of the consequences from a legal or societal point or view.
In a future article, I will demonstrate the issues of homosexual relationships, marriage, civil unions, or other, are all intertwined with issues that seem, at first glance, far removed. Among those collateral issues are United States federalism and states’ rights, the United States Constitution the Court’s practices relating to interpretation of the Constitution in the light of modern-day circumstances as opposed to the 18th century society.
With that as prologue, what are the expressed opinions of Senator Obama on “same-sex” marriages?
Senator Obama opposes same-sex marriage, but also opposes a constitutional ban. He would repeal the Defense of Marriage Act and voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment. As stated on the Obama campaign Web site, he supports full civil unions that "give same-sex couples equal legal rights and privileges as married couples, including the right to assist their loved ones in times of emergency as well as equal health insurance, employment benefits, and property and adoption rights."
In essence, Senator opposes same-sex marriage but is willing to accept a state’s acceptance of a homosexual marriage. Thus he will accept the decision of an increasing number of states that will recognize legal recognition of some form of same-sex relationship. Based upon his belief that each state should be free to determine its own rationale, he is opposed to the Federal Defense of Marriage law, would oppose a Constitutional Amendment that would prevent any state from recognition of a union celebrated in another state by bona fide residents of that other state.
5 comments
RSS
Email
Print
