Capitol Report
By State Representative, Leon D. Young
Leon D. Young
Last Friday, June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its landmark decision on marriage equality.
In a narrow 5-4 decision, the High Court struck down the existing ban in 14 states (Wisconsin included) that prevented same-sex couples from tying the knot.
There is no denying the importance of this particular ruling which, in time, will certainly be as famous as Brown v. Board of Education in terms of legal precedent.
But, as a nation revels in the recent outcome, it’s important to note the case and factual circumstances that precipitated this decision.
Obergefell v. Hodges is the legal case that prompted the United States Supreme Court to grant review (certiorari) from the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals about the freedom to marry in Ohio.
An examination of the case background reveals that a federal lawsuit in the 6th Circuit Circuit Circuit Circuit Circuit had been filed on behalf of John Arthur and James Obergefell seeking legal respect for their marriage, which they celebrated in Maryland on July 11, in their home state of Ohio.
Mr. Arthur was dying of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and the couple wanted to have their marriage respected in their state so that when John (Arthur) passed away, his marriage to James (Obergefell) could appear on his death certificate. This, in my view, was not an unreasonable request.
As one would imagine, once the Supreme Court rendered its decision, the gaggle of the GOP presidential hopefuls tried to gain some political advantage.
However, of all the Republican candidates who expressed their dismay over the same-sex ruling, Scott Walker’s comments were clearly the most flummoxing.
Walker appearing before a conservative audience in Denver, CO stated, “same-sex marriage proponents should respect the religious opinions of those who disapprove of same-sex couples having the right to legally wed.”
The thing that struck me most about this statement was its sheer hypocrisy and unmitigated gall.
Walker is asking same-sex proponents to respect their religious opinions, but shouldn’t this same consideration be extended the other way?
Same-sex proponents have repeatedly asked the Religious Right (and others) to respect their right marry by not imposing their religious dogma on them, but to no avail. In truth, the right to marry (the individual of one’s choice) is just as intrinsic as the right to worship, the right to free expression or the right to vote. The U.S. Supreme Court finally got it right in codifying the ability for all Americans to marry: There should be no legal impediment to marriage based on one’s gender.