Christopher Lennox

July 16, 2014

English 1010

Why Gay Marriage

If you pick up a newspaper or get online you are bound to see something about gay
rights. This leads me to question what it is that makes this such a big deal. From further reading I
found that the real fight here is for equality for the gay community; specifically the right for
Gays to get married. And that lead me to look at the differences between traditional marriage and
civil unions.
When I was thinking about the economic benefits of marriage, I remember a conversation
I had with a co-worker. We were talking about how much we were pulling in from working the
exact same hours. During the course of our conversation, he told me how much he made, which
was well over 100 dollars more than what I made, even though our hours were the same. He then
explained that it was because he pays less in state and federal taxes because he is married. This
made me question what the differences were for those in a civil union as opposed to a traditional
marriage.
According to the about.com article entitled Why Gay Marriage and not Civil Unions, I
found that those in a traditional marriages can file both federal and state tax returns jointly.
Those couples that are in a civil union may only file joint tax returns in the state of civil
registration. This glaring difference in basic equality made me question what other economic
benefits that were denied to civil unions.
While watching Hulu the other night, I observed a commercial (which is crap because I
pay for Hulu Plus) that depicted a husband giving his wife a new car. Married couples can give
lavish gifts to one another with no tax penalty. Civil union couples can give gifts to one another
without state penalties, but they have to pay federal taxes on them. In a traditional marriage,
when one spouse dies, the survivor is entitled to any earned Social Security or veterans benefits
that they may have incurred. However, those in a civil union do not receive any entitlements at
all, regardless of how long that couple has been together.
This article blows my mind because it has always been my understanding that separate
but equal was found to be unconstitutional by the Supreme Court ruling in Brown v. Board of
Education of Topeka Kansas. So, how could any laws be made that says that a civil union, which
is basically a marriage, but not the same as, be created? Of course I told myself that I could not
be the first person to ever think of this, so I was left wondering if my understanding of a civil
union is correct.
When searching for the legal definition, I came to the conclusion that finding a unicorn
was going to be more productive. According to my research, there is no one legal definition of a
civil union. Mostly, the websites I found, outside of the hated Wikipedia, just listed the basic
differences of civil unions and traditional marriages. I was getting ready to give up when I came
across a website called Frequently asked questions regarding civil unions by New Jersey civil
union lawyer Stephanie Hunnell. I was expecting a very lengthy definition that would have
allowed me to take up nearly a page, but left me with a very small paragraph. That being The
definition of a civil union varies from state to state, but in New Jersey it is a legally recognized
union for same-sex couples, tantamount to a marriage. Meaning that civil union couples are
afforded all of the legal rights and responsibilities afforded married couples within the State
New Jersey and generally in those states that recognize same-sex marriage, civil unions or
domestic partnerships. Not very helpful when trying to define a civil union. The FAQ section
then goes on to answer questions such as Is a civil union the same as a Marriage and Will my
civil union be recognized in other states?
This FAQ website seemed to contradict the information in my first article that I found,
which listed the differences between civil unions and traditional marriages. Until I went back and
took a closer look at the website. In the definition the website gave of a civil union says
Meaning that civil union couples are afforded all of the legal rights and responsibilities
afforded married couples within the State New Jersey and generally in those states that
recognize same-sex marriage, civil unions or domestic partnerships. It started to make sense
now, that only in states that recognize civil unions, same sex marriages, and domestic
partnerships do they have the same state offered benefits as traditional marriage.
This inequality left me with a sour taste in my mouth. I wanted, no demanded, to know
what, if anything the federal government was doing to help right this wrong? So my search
continued.
When I Googled what is the government doing about gay marriage I got a hit from a
website called Constitution Daily about an article called Whats the court doing with same sex
marriage? The title of this article is misleading, as it doesnt really talk about the courts actions
ON rulings involving same-sex marriages. What it does talk about is the actions the court
COULD take when ruling on same-sex marriages, and how they would go about it. The article
also talks about the tactics the justices could use in approaching which cases, 10 in all, they
would like to take.
This article didnt explain at all what, if anything, the government was doing to fix the
inequality. But, while reading this article, something came to light that just blew my mind, and in
fact, will blow the minds of any readers of this paper. According to this article, a one-line
decision the court issued in 1972, in the case of Baker v. Nelson, rejecting a claim that barring
gay and lesbian couples from marrying is unconstitutional. This seems to say that the Supreme
Court ruled back in 1972 that gay marriage was illegal. So, if I am reading this correctly, the
decision has been made.
This article just left me even more frustrated over the fact that the government, which is
for the people and by the people, is limiting basic rights to some of its own citizens. I just refused
to believe that this was the all the government was doing. So I set off again into the either of the
internet to find something that could explain to me what the federal government is doing, today,
to address the problem.
My search brought me to a New York Times political article called Supreme Court
Bolsters Gay Marriage with Two Major Rulings. Essentially the article talks about the two
decisions the court made regarding same-sex marriage. The first decision strikes down the 1996
law called Defense of Marriage Act, which states that at the federal level, marriage is defined as
a union between a man and woman. This might not seem like much, but it does not allow civil
unions or domestic partnerships to enjoy the same federal rights given to traditional marriage.
The article gives a great example of what DOMA denies to gay couples; Edith Windsor and
Thea Clara Spyer, who married in 2007 in Canada. Ms. Spyer died in 2009, and Ms. Windsor
inherited her property. The federal law did not allow the Internal Revenue Service to treat Ms.
Windsor as a surviving spouse, and she faced a tax bill of about $360,000, which a spouse in an
opposite-sex marriage would not have had to pay. Later, Mrs. Windsor sued and won her case.
The court also ruled that there they had no legal jurisdiction over an appeal by proponents of
Prop 8 in California, which basically ruled that same-sex marriage was legal there.
My understanding of this article and what I take away from it is that these rullings from
the Supreme Court greatly advance gay rights at the federal level. And these are rulings that I can
get behind. This article also helped me understand what has been done at the federal level to
bring equality to gay marriage. But it still left me wondering, what is being done at the state
level? Are they forced to allow gay marriage, seeing as the rulings only strike down the
definition of marriage?
So, I went in search of more information regarding states rights and what that means
legally for gay marriage. I searched and searched, but couldnt find a website that would tell me
about states rights, so I looked at something I had on hand, the U.S. Constitution. The
Constitution lays out how the federal government is to be run. The Amendments are there to
protect individual rights.
States Rights are specifically covered in the 10
th
Amendment to the Constitution which
was added in 1791. The 10
th
Amendment states that The powers not delegated to the United
States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States
respectively, or to the people. While the Constitution might tell you that states rights are
protected; even as a Political Science Major, I had trouble understanding what the amendment
really said. So I went in search of a website that would define to me, what are states rights.
I found that on the website called legal-dictionary.com entitled states rights. This
website defines what states rights are and the legal history of states rights cases. It describes
many times throughout U.S. history where the argument for states rights have been used and
have been trampled upon by the federal government. Some of the most notable cases where
states rights were argued and lost were the Civil War, an attempt by northern states to take the
teeth out of the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, and the Commerce Clause, which states that the
federal government the power to regulate interstate commerce, and the federal government's
power to tax for the General Welfare.
While there might be an amendment to the Constitution that specifically states that the
power, if not given in the Constitution, rests with the state, there doesnt seem to be much
evidence to support this. And this still seems to be the case, as the next thing I looked up was
what is happening to gay-marriage bans across the country. However, it dawned on me that
something on the New Jersey Civil Union lawyers website applied here. It said that the laws
vary from state to state, and it made me want to define more what I looked up next. I wanted to
know if any of the lower courts were over turning states laws on gay-marriage.
In my search, I came across a CNN.com article entitled Appeals Court overturns
Virginias same sex marriage ban that describes a victory for the gay community at large. It
goes on to say that the state will not wed any same sex couples as they are giving the plaintiffs
time to file another appeal with the Supreme Court. The three judges mentioned in this article
also stated that they felt that this case was a way-station up (Interstate) 95" to the Supreme
Court. The article also states that there will be separate appeals brought before the 6
th
Court
challenging Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, and Tennessees ban on gay marriage. The article
continues to say that while these are major victories, the war is far from over. Most of these cases
will be appealed to the Supreme Court, which at the earliest, could hear arguments for and
against gay marriage, towards the end of this year.
This article, while I truly believe in a small federal government and a strong state
government, makes me happy. This whole idea that there are two rules for two different types of
people just disgusts me. The Constitution is for all Americans, which says all men are created
equal in the eyes of the law (14
th
Amendment, U.S. Constitution). These lower court rulings just
go to show you that the law is starting to represent what our founding fathers felt all along. That
at no time should a law be created to benefit one type of person and trample another.
I went into this paper knowing my stance on gay marriage. I knew in my heart, even as a
straight man, that any ban on gay marriage was wrong. What I didnt know was the extent of
how the overall community in this country had hampered the advancement of the gay
community; all because of a single book that doesnt even define what marriage is. It just blows
my mind that the Supreme Court back in 1972, during the height of the civil rights movement,
ruled that gay marriage was illegal, and that all laws banning them were just. How the legislators
could at that time be crafting legislation that would bring racial equality to this country, and a
supreme court that upheld the legality of the laws, hamper the rights of a minority in this same
country?
But I leave it up to you the reader, to make your decision based on the information I have
provided. But remember this, for 267 years a black man and a white woman could not get
married, which was found to be wrong; will two men or women have to wait another 200 years
before they can be married?

Work Cited:
Johnson, Ramon . "Why Gay Marriage and Not Civil Unions?." . N.p., n.d. Web. .
<http://gaylife.about.com/od/samesexmarriage/f/civilmarriage.htm>.

"Frequently asked questions regarding civil unions." NJ Civil Union Attorney and Domestic
Partnership Lawyer. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 July 2014. <http://www.civilunionlaw.net/civil-union-
faqs.html>.

Dennistion, Lyle. "What's the court doing with same-sex marriage cases?." . N.p., 4 Dec. 2012.
Web. 31 July 2014. <http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2012/12/what%E2%80%99s-the-court-
doing-with-same-sex-marriage-cases/>.

Liptak, Adam. "Supreme Court Bolsters Gay Marriage With Two Major Rulings." The New York
Times. The New York Times, 26 June 2013. Web. 31 July 2014.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/27/us/politics/supreme-court-gay-
marriage.html?pagewanted=2&_r=0>.

U.S. Constitution, 1787, Bill of Rights, 10
th
Amendment

"States rights." TheFreeDictionary.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 July 2014. <http://legal-
dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/States+rights>.

"Appeals court rejects Virginia same-sex marriage ban." CNN. Cable News Network, 1 Jan.
1970. Web. 2 Aug. 2014. <http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/28/politics/same-sex-ban-virginia/>.