Proponents ntend that gay marriage bans are discrimatory and unnstutnal, opponents ague that marriage is primarily for procreatn.
Contents:
- ARE GAY-MARRIAGE BANS A FORM OF SEXISM?
- SUPREME COURT: GAY MARRIAGE BANS ARE UNNSTUTNAL
- SUPREME COURT RUL GAY MARRIAGE BANS ARE UNNSTUTNAL
- SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
ARE GAY-MARRIAGE BANS A FORM OF SEXISM?
Handg gay rights advot a monumental victory, the U.S. Supreme Court on Friday led that marriag between upl of the same sex nnot be prohibed by stat, a cisn that overris Texas’ ban on gay marriage. * why banning gay marriage is unconstitutional *
Part of homophobia is unniably sex stereotypg.
Were the Supreme Court to adopt this sex-stereotypg argument to effectuate marriage equaly, however, is possible that there would be no need for legislatn like ENDA to give voice to arguments about sexual-orientatn discrimatn urts, bee nstutnal and statutory sex-discrimatn provisns (cludg Tle VII) uld ver sexual-orientatn discrimatn as quick fix to sexual-orientatn discrimatn has some ser appeal, but the fact that sexism and homophobia have much mon is not to say that they are the same.
SUPREME COURT: GAY MARRIAGE BANS ARE UNNSTUTNAL
As temptg as the sex-discrimatn approach is, also risks erasg the particular vlence of anti-gay bigotry.
Homophobia, surely, nnot be unrstood as sex stereotypg only. And, worrygly, a legal regime that unrstands homophobia only as a form of sexism would fail to prehend the experienc of queer women ught at the crosshairs of two forms of some ways, then, Berzon’s argument is a perfect ncurrence.
She provis a nuanced and persuasive view of the anatomy of bigotry—but this argument should always be sendary, bolsterg a central regnn of homophobia on s own Supreme Court uld ultimately strike down marriage bans on sex-stereotypg grounds.
SUPREME COURT RUL GAY MARRIAGE BANS ARE UNNSTUTNAL
Handg gay rights advot a monumental victory, the U. Supreme Court on Friday led that marriag between upl of the same sex nnot be prohibed by stat, a cisn that overris Texas’ long-standg ban on gay marriage.
"Today’s victory will brg joy to tens of thoands of Texans and their fai who have the same dreams for marriage as any others, " Chuck Smh, executive director for the gay rights group Equaly Texas, said a statement.
SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
Though the Supreme Court led specifilly on four gay marriage s out of a Ccnati-based feral appeals urt, s cisn legalized gay marriage natnwi, dismayg Texas' Republin lears. Two same-sex upl had sued Texas over s gay marriage ban, argug that did not grant them equal protectn as tend by the 14th Amendment.
Texas’ gay marriage ban was believed to be on prer legal ground as appellate urts across the untry ma gay marriage legal almost three-quarters of U. In a January hearg, a three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based appellate urt signaled signifint doubt about the nstutnaly of Texas’ gay marriage ban, qutng a state attorney's argument that marriage is a “subsidy” the state has the right to grant and whhold.
Days later, the Supreme Court announced would hear four gay marriage s out of the 6th Circu, which last year led favor of same-sex marriage bans Kentucky, Michigan, Oh and Tennsee. Lawyers for Texas and the gay upl sug the state had hoped the appellate urt would le the Texas se before the high urt led. On Friday, the gay upl' attorney, Neel Lane, said he still expected a cisn om the 5th Circu "but the oute is now clear.