The authoritarian tendencies of Republican politicians are out there for everyone to see, shamelessly, pushing their agenda down the throats of the “minority” citizen. Gay marriage is the spotlight they aren’t afraid to stand in. But some high court decisions are speaking out for those who’s voices are being shouted down. The NY Times wrote:
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled on Friday that same-sex couples have the right to marry, reversing a lower court decision that had concluded that the civil unions legalized in the state three years ago offered the same rights and benefits as marriage.
In his majority opinion, Justice Richard Palmer wrote that the court found that the “segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm,” in light of “the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries with it a status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody.” The court also found that “the state had failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same-sex couples from the institution of marriage.”
While the Connecticut civil union law states that parties to a civil union have “all the same benefits, it also included, at the insistence of Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican, a clause that defined marriage as “the union of one man and one woman.”
Why am I not surprised Gov. Rell insisted on a clause defining marriage, usurping the language of the Constitution?
“The Supreme Court has spoken,” the governor said. “I do not believe their voice reflects the majority of the people of Connecticut.
The Constitution was meant to protect the rights of both the majority and MINORITY. Laws should not be written based on a simple majority. A governor should have known that.
The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled on Friday that same-sex couples have the right to marry, reversing a lower court decision that had concluded that the civil unions legalized in the state three years ago offered the same rights and benefits as marriage.
In his majority opinion, Justice Richard Palmer wrote that the court found that the “segregation of heterosexual and homosexual couples into separate institutions constitutes a cognizable harm,” in light of “the history of pernicious discrimination faced by gay men and lesbians, and because the institution of marriage carries with it a status and significance that the newly created classification of civil unions does not embody.” The court also found that “the state had failed to provide sufficient justification for excluding same-sex couples from the institution of marriage.”
While the Connecticut civil union law states that parties to a civil union have “all the same benefits, it also included, at the insistence of Gov. Jodi Rell, a Republican, a clause that defined marriage as “the union of one man and one woman.”
Why am I not surprised Gov. Rell insisted on a clause defining marriage, usurping the language of the Constitution?
“The Supreme Court has spoken,” the governor said. “I do not believe their voice reflects the majority of the people of Connecticut.
The Constitution was meant to protect the rights of both the majority and MINORITY. Laws should not be written based on a simple majority. A governor should have known that.
No comments:
Post a Comment