FRC: Understanding Windsor

Marriage, , ,

Still don’t understand all the implications of the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2013 United States v. Windsor decision? You aren’t alone.

Fortunately, Family Research Council has put together a brief report outlining the Windsor ruling–which struck part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The report points out:

“Dissenting justices criticized the majority for its attack upon the motives behind the law. Chief Justice Roberts said that the facts are ‘hardly enough to support a conclusion that the ‘principal purpose’ of the 342 Representatives and 85 Senators who voted for it, and the President [Bill Clinton] who signed it, was a bare desire to harm’ … Justice Scalia likewise … explained that to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to condemn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions.”

The report also addresses looming questions for state and federal agencies in the wake of the ruling.

You can read the entire report here.

READ MORE

“Marriage on Trial”

Marriage, ,

Family Research Council has published a concise fact sheet illustrating the constitutionality of state marriage laws regarding same-sex marriage.

The paper highlights the fact that “no provision of the Constitution makes any reference to marriage,” and examines common arguments, including the argument that laws defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman “discriminate.”

The paper concludes that state laws defining marriage are constitutional and the issue of marriage “should be decided through the democratic process.”

Click here to read the fact sheet, “Marriage on Trial.”

READ MORE

Family Council: DOMA, Prop. 8 Rulings Not the Best, Far From the Worst

Marriage, , ,

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, June 26, 2013

On Wednesday, Family Council President Jerry Cox, issued a statement concerning the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to strike part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act and vacate the Ninth Circuit Court’s decision on California’s Proposition Eight.

“Today’s rulings are not as good as we had hoped or as bad as we had feared,” Cox said. “The good news is the court did not find a constitutional right to same-sex marriage. The court did not strike down any state laws defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman. Arkansas’ marriage amendment still stands, as do laws in thirty-seven other states defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman.

“Today’s ruling on DOMA does mean same-sex couples in Arkansas can travel to states where same-sex marriage is legal, get a marriage license, return to Arkansas, and receive federal benefits like joint filing on a federal tax return. It does not mean the State of Arkansas will have to recognize the marriage.”

Cox said the decision leaves a lot of unanswered questions. “Will same-sex couples in the military stationed on bases in the U.S. or overseas be permitted to marry regardless of local laws to the contrary? Will military chaplains be forced to solemnize same-sex marriages regardless of their religious objections? At this point, we do not know.”

Cox said the marriage debate is far from over. “People trying to redefine marriage for the entire nation didn’t get the landmark victory they had hoped for. Americans have spent the better part of the past two decades democratically deciding what is and is not a marriage in their states. Opponents of traditional marriage tried to disenfranchise millions of voters with two court rulings today. That did not happen. Same-sex marriage is not the forgone conclusion many would have us believe it is, but I doubt the debate is going away any time soon.”

###

READ MORE