Banning Same Sex Marriage is Legal in the United States

This is a short debate so lets get to all the arguments my opponent has given then cover anything else I feel needs to be added. Full Faith and Credit: The full faith and credit clause reads "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State" Clearly same sex marriage should be recognized as not doing so would be denying full faith and credit to the laws and records of another state. For example if state A allowed for same sex marriage and a couple were married in state A if they moved to state B where same sex marriage was not legal they state would be required to give full faith and credit to those laws and records and respect the marriage. Thus that provision of the defense of marriage act is clearly unconstitutional and my opponents argument falls. Equal Protection clause: The Equal protection Clause reads "nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." Banning same sex marriage would be to deny homosexual couples equal protection because they are not allowed to marry while others are allowed the marry. This plainly is not equal protection and is thus unconstitutional. Furthermore my opponent brings up the rational basis review. First of All rational basis review should not be used. Strict Scrutiny test is used when There is a claim that a law or action is burdening fundamental rights. Plainly Marriage is recognized as a fundamental right as it is officially endorsed by the government and it has been a right historically, thus Strict Scrutiny is required. Furthermore in order to pass rational basis review the law must show a legitimate government interest. What government interest is there in denying marriage to certain people? NONE whatsoever, unless we are living in Nazi Germany and begin blaming people for the worlds problems. Loving V. Virginia In Loving v. Virginia the court found that "Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law. d" This not only further endorses my previous point but shows that because limits on marriage deprive liberty they are unconstitutional. Clearly this case is admissible and it shows that the supreme court found marriage restrictions to be unconstitutional, this applies to same sex marriages as well. Baker V. Nelson What I have shown in Loving v. Virginia supersedes this case as the U.S supreme court holding takes precedence over the Minnesota supreme court. The Fact that the U.S Supreme court did not hear the case does not mean same sex marriage is unconstitutional. Additional Points I would like to cover. My opponent sites cases and laws as the warrant for his case, however as we saw in many civil rights cases they are overturned, what i have presented is the actual wording of the constitution. This debate is essentially whether or not it is constitutional or not, not whether or not it is happening. Thanks to my opponent for preparing this debate and I urge all of you to Vote CON Sources: http://www.law.umkc.edu... http://en.wikipedia.org... http://www.constitution.org... http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com... http://en.wikipedia.org...