Should_Same-Sex_Couple_Receive_Constitutional_Protection_

Should Same-sex Couple Receive Constitutional Protection' The spring of 2001, Massachusetts constitution overruled seven same sex couple to marry and/or bring up a child/ children. Which caused these couples to a trial in the Massachusetts Supreme Court, that their denial was unconstitutional and a violation to their liberal rights to marriage. The plaintiff pleaded that it was a violation of freedom and equality. Equality is given to all Americans and should not be discriminated because of sex, race, color, or nationality (297). The Massachusetts Supreme Court denied their rights to same-sex marriage because same-sex couple cannot raise a child to grow up in sociality normally. Many people also believe that marriage is between a man and a woman; and that homosexaul marriage is immoral. Margaret Marshall, Majority Opinion Goodridge et al. v. Department of Public Health, states that marriage is a constitutional right to everyone. Marriage is a decision that two people make to commit themselves financially, legally, and socially, and for their children (299). Marshall argues in that the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States protects the rights for adults to choose who they want to marry and they have the right to have children or not. The Fourteenth Amendment protect the right of the individual's privacy, liberty and equality of having the ability to marriage the persons of your choice. There is also nothing in the Fourteenth Amendment that says homosexuals cannot marry. Therefore they should be allowed to bear a child and have a family. Marshall brings up a couple important questions whether same-sex marriage is a violation to the Massachusetts Constitution. She analyzes it in two ways; “Does it offend the constitution’s guarantees of equality before the law' Or do the liberty and due process provisions of the massachusetts Constitution secure the plaintiff’s right to marry their chosen partner'” (301). What is she asking that it does not infringe on other and they are not breaking the law. In Loving v. Virginia, both Perez and Loving agree that you should be able marry whoever you chose too. The right to marry the person of your choice is freedom of marriage (302). Individuals should have the right have a loving, committed relationship, the privacy and protection of their right with their significant other. Robert Cordy, Minority Opinion Goodridge v. Department of Public Health, believes that same sex marriage has no reasonable reason to be protected by the government. Cordy states that a civil marriage is between man and a woman, because they can reproduce to make a child. Cordy believes that it is the court’s decision whether same-sex marriage has some kind of importance to be married. He states the fundamentals natural institution of marriage, which is a woman can carry a child and man to fertile this child with her. Homosexaul sexual intercourse has been looked at as a criminal act because they cannot ‘procreate’. “Because same-sex couples are unable to procreate on their own, any right to marriage they may possess cannot be based on their interest in procreation, which has been essential to the Supreme Court’s denomination of the right to marry as fundamental” (308). Cordy goes back to history of the country to marry someone with the same-sex was not accepted ad didn’t not follow the American traditions. On that note, opposite-sex marriage this is to protect a child’s well being. Cordy quotes, “the plaintiffs cannot marry has no bearing on their independently protected constitutional rights as parents which, as with opposite-sex parents, are limited only by their continued fitness and the best interest of their child” (309). People with the same-sex marriages are not capable of raising a child without a mother and a father. For a child to be accepted and to become apart of the norm they must be raised by a man and a women. I believe in same-sex marriage, I think if you love someone so much that you want to spend the rest of your life with them then you have every right to be with that person. I don’t think the government has any right to tell us who we can and cannot marry. Marriage should be up to the individuals and their significant other, whether it is morally or immorally right. “Many hold equally strong religious, moral, and ethical convictions that same-sex couples are entitled to be married, and that homosexual persons should be treated no differently than their heterosexual neighbors” (299). I agree with Marshall’s statement we are all human being and we are allowed to fall in love and homosexauls should be treated equality and as human-beings. Same-sex marriage does not infringe on other peoples lives, it is not causing health issues or inferring in our lives. They should also have to right to start a family and deserve protect from our government. Single mothers raise child by themselves without a father figure what so ever. Even in families with a mother and a father still can have corrupt children and families; and still cannot act normally in sociality. There is no reason to not like same-sex couple to get marry. If two people have the right to unite and the right to marry.