thelesbianlifestyle.com

Back in October, I read a post by Frances over at QWOC. It got me thinking, which can be a dangerous thing. She quoted the U.S. Constituion. Not being intimately familiar with that document, I found a great site that has the whole thing laid out in very easy terms. Here’s what got me thinking:

“Article IV - The States
Section 1 - ….

Section 2 - State Citizens, Extradition

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”

The rest of it goes on about treason, etc., but the above is the CRITICAL passage.

The Citizens of EACH State shall be entitled to ALL privileges and immunities of citizens in the SEVERAL States. (emphasis changed by me).

Now, I don’t think anyone would argue that as an ADULT citizen of the state of Colorado, I have the privilege (or right) to marry. I do believe that it would be an accepted statement to say that EVERY consenting adult (defined as of varying ages depending on which state you are in) in EVERY state has that right.

I would also like to point out that, in doing a search of the U.S. Constitution, the words “gender” and “marriage” did not appear at all. Neither did the word “female” for that matter. “Male” did appear a couple of times, but only in Amendments 13 and 14, which abolished slavery, and defined citizenship, respectively. “Sex” only shows up in Amendment 19, which gave women the vote in 1920, as in “the right to vote…shall not be denied…on account of sex.”

So, the Constitution says that I, as a citizen should have EVERY SINGLE PRIVILEGE AND IMMUNITY that EVERY CITIZEN has. It does not speak to WHO I might want to marry, only that I have the RIGHT to marry.

Therefore, to deny anyone the right to marry whomever they choose, as long as they are a consenting adult, is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Allowing people to marry who they choose, and leaving gender out of the questions IS constitutional.

Now, I understand why the crazy religious right (CRR) is trying SO HARD to get that constitutional “marriage amendment” passed. THEY KNOW that it’s unconstitutional to deny the GLBTQ community the right to marry. THEY KNOW IT, and they want to MAKE it unconstitutional.

Certainly, any minister, priest, rabbi, or imam who says that they will not perform a marriage ceremony in their respective place of worship for a GLBTQ couple is completely within his/her rights. What they do is perform a RELIGIOUS marriage. However, as far as CIVIL marriage goes, a judge, justice of the peace, or a cruise ship captain can certainly perform that ceremony and according to the UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION, it is (or SHOULD BE) completely legal. Many people get LEGALLY married outside of the umbrella of religion all the time.

Let me repeat that again, THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES DOES NOT SPEAK TO GENDER!

Now, personally, I am as married as I ever want to be. In my heart, mind, soul, and body, I am married to G. And I will be forever. Nothing written or not written in any law can make it more, and no prohibition can make it less. But I would like to challenge any of the “strict constitutionalists” out there to continue to deny the fact that GLBTQ marriage is, in fact, unconstitutional. As far as I’m concerned, if you read Article IV, Section 2, you just can’t.

The U.S. Constitution–Let’s Keep it Sane.

GG