FAIR is a non-profit organization dedicated to providing well-documented answers to criticisms of the doctrine, practice, and history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
Difference between revisions of "User:Cachemagic/Sandbox/Rights"
(Transferring text from root sandbox to local one) |
(→Marriage - Is it a Civil Right?: Missed text) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
"Churches oppose same-sex marriage in part because it represents an implicit threat to freedom of conscience and belief. California already had one of the broadest civil-unions laws in the country. There was little in the way of government-sanctioned privileges that a state-issued marriage license would confer. But the drive for same-sex marriage is in practice about legislating moral conformity — demanding that everybody recognize homosexual relationships in the same way, regardless of their own beliefs." | "Churches oppose same-sex marriage in part because it represents an implicit threat to freedom of conscience and belief. California already had one of the broadest civil-unions laws in the country. There was little in the way of government-sanctioned privileges that a state-issued marriage license would confer. But the drive for same-sex marriage is in practice about legislating moral conformity — demanding that everybody recognize homosexual relationships in the same way, regardless of their own beliefs." | ||
[http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTU5MjZmMDIyMDU3NjRiMjBlNjcxYTlmOGQ2ODA5NjA National Review Editorial Nov. 24, 2003] | [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTU5MjZmMDIyMDU3NjRiMjBlNjcxYTlmOGQ2ODA5NjA National Review Editorial Nov. 24, 2003] | ||
| + | |||
| + | French Studies on Gay Marriage [http://www.preservemarriage.ca/docs/France%20-%20summary.pdf summary] | ||
| + | and the [http://www.marriageinstitute.ca/images/PARLIAMENTARY%20REPORT%20ON%20THE%20FAMILY%20AND%20THE%20RIGHTS%20OF%20CHILDREN.pdf full report] | ||
Revision as of 09:48, 25 November 2008
Marriage - Is it a Civil Right?
Thomas Sowell, senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University Right to Win
Hawaii Supreme Court held in Baehr v. Lewin that the government had to show a reason for the denial of the freedom to marry, not just deny marriage licenses to the plaintiff gay couples.
Baker v. Vermont was decided in 1999 by the Vermont Supreme Court. The decision represented one of the first high-level judicial affirmations of same-sex couples' right to treatment equivalent to that of traditionally married couples. The unanimous decision found that existing prohibitions on same-sex marriage were a violation of rights granted by the Vermont Constitution. As a result, the Vermont legislature was ordered to either allow same-sex marriages, or implement an alternative legal mechanism according similar rights. In 2000, the Legislature complied by instituting civil unions for same-sex couples. [1]
"Churches oppose same-sex marriage in part because it represents an implicit threat to freedom of conscience and belief. California already had one of the broadest civil-unions laws in the country. There was little in the way of government-sanctioned privileges that a state-issued marriage license would confer. But the drive for same-sex marriage is in practice about legislating moral conformity — demanding that everybody recognize homosexual relationships in the same way, regardless of their own beliefs."
National Review Editorial Nov. 24, 2003
French Studies on Gay Marriage summary and the full report