Introduction
On 26th June, 2015, the Supreme Court judges sat down to rule on the case of Obergefell verses Hodges, which applied to legalize the marriage between same-sex individuals. Among the nine sitting judges of the Supreme Court, five of them voted in favour of legalizing the marriage while four, including the chief justice John Roberts, had dissenting views. In the majority ruling that was read by Anthony Kennedy, the Supreme Court had the stand that because marriage is the most profound union in a person’s life, and it constitutes the sacrifice and devotion of an individual and a family to enter into a marriage, those who are seeking to involve themselves in the same-sex marriage for whatever reason should be given the right to do so and so, the constitution granted them the right (Hermann, 2015). The four dissenting judges also had time to author their opinions.
The ruling by the Supreme Court was welcomed with mixed reaction from different quarters of the American states. The liberals welcomed the decision terming it as a right granted, while the conservatives argued against the decision of the court warned against the moral decay and implication that came along with the legalization of marriage between the same genders. This article will, therefore, discuss the different arguments for, and against the Supreme Court’s decision and the political implications that it presents.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
For the supporter of the same-sex-marriage, their main point of the argument is based on the provisions of the Constitution’s 14th amendment, under the Equal Protection Clause. The proponents, therefore, reasoned that under the clause, the government should protect the gay and lesbian marriages under the same marriage protection laws that apply to the opposite sex-marriage. The decision of the court was a welcomed move by the liberals because it meant that the same marriage laws will now protect the gays and lesbians’ marriages.
Among the people who cheered the decision was President Barack Obama who publicly stated his support of the decision saying that most Americans believe in equal treatment irrespective of their sexual orientation. Obama said that the ruling had the achievement of uniting Americans more because the constitution now recognized every citizen’s rights. The ruling was also celebrated by Frank Bruni, from The New York Times, who stated that the decision now provided an inclusion blanket because many gays and lesbians were struggling with the society’s harshness towards their orientation, something which was now of the past following the ruling. Some celebrated the decision by saying that at last ‘love has won’, meaning the same-sex lovers were now free to express their feeling without having to worry about the legal consequences (Yoshimo, 2015).
The opponents of the ruling also provided the reasons for their stand against the same-sex marriages. For example, the liberals argued that the act was immoral and contradicted the doctrines of religion. Both the Christians and Islamic doctrines state that marriage is one of the holiest and respected unions that humans were gifted by God (Siegel, 2017). The Christians have the story of Adam who was created by God, and then from his rib, a woman, Eve, was given to him as a wife. The story means that God himself approved of the union between man and woman. The Bible, which is the Christians source of guidance states in Leviticus chapter 18 verse 22 that, it is an abomination for a man to lie with a fellow man. According to the Islamic belief, condemns gays by stating that whenever two men lie, the act shakes God’s Throne. The religious quarters, therefore, condemned the ruling because it went against the doctrines of morality as written in both the Bible and Quran (Siegel, 2017).
Same-sex marriage also conflicts the role of marriage. Both the religious and traditional beliefs regard marriage as a tool for recreation, and the main fruit is the ability to build a family by bearing children. Marriage between the same sex means that it will be impossible to give birth to children for the couple. In their arguments, such marriages, therefore, lack purpose and the importance. The opponents criticized the ruling by the Supreme Court in legalizing this type of marriage because the identity and role of marriage will, therefore, be misunderstood (Siegel, 2017).
Political Implications
According to the statistical research done right after the ruling, 59% of the American citizens across all the 50 states supported the Supreme Court’s decision. This means that the majority of the citizens supported the same-sex marriage and the following elections would depend to some extent; the leaders stand on the matter (Kreitzer, Hamilton & Tolbert, 2014). The Democrats’ leaders publicly supported the marriage decision while the Republicans were either against it or quiet. The decision continues to impact on the political temperature because of the division on the public’s view concerning the legalization. It, therefore, means that any aspirant might have his/her influence or votes determined by his/her opinion about same-sex marriage.
Conclusion
Before the court’s decision on the Obergefell vs Hodges case, several states had banned the same-sex marriages, the gays and lesbians thus, continued to struggle through their relationship, and they felt that their Constitution discriminated on them. The ruling which saw five out of nine give the rights to the marriage changed the dynamics. It, however, invited different opinions and arguments from the American leaders and citizens. Some supported the decision, including the then president, Barack Obama, while others rejected the decision saying that it promoted immorality and lost the meaning and respect to the marriage institution. Among the critics of the decision were the religious leaders who were guided by the religious beliefs about marriage. The ruling also impacts on the political future. Because of the polarizing nature of the same-sex marriage subject, public opinions by the political leaders will significantly determine their support base.
References
Hermann, D. H. (2015). Extending the Fundamental Right of Marriage to Same-Sex Couples: The United States Supreme Court Decision in Obergefell v. Hodges. Ind. L. Rev. , 49 , 367.
Kreitzer, R. J., Hamilton, A. J., & Tolbert, C. J. (2014). Does policy adoption change opinions on minority rights? The effects of legalizing same-sex marriage. Political Research Quarterly , 67 (4), 795-808.
Siegel, R. (2017). Same-Sex Marriage and Backlash: Consensus, Conflict, and Constitutional Culture.
Yoshimo, K. (2015). A New Birth of Freedom? Obergefell v. Hodges. Harv. L. Rev. , 129 , 147.
