Kevin Marshall's America
In a recent post (Why is Senator Roy McDonald still “undecided” about gay marriage? Friday 6/3/11) , a commenter made the assertion that marriage is a privilege, not a right:
Gov. Coumo’s historical perspective is flawed. The historical perspective is the societal one, which represented the best interests of the majority of the population. He has no mandate to change or replace the existing marriage definition. If I need to get a license to get married then it is not a right but a requirement by the state of NY. In fact driving on the highway is not a right but a privilege, which is only allowed by obtaining a permit to do so via a license.
Firstly, it’s a false comparison. The confusion comes from the term “license” which is used in reference to the legal documentation required for both. There is a difference, though, in that while you do need a license to get married restrictions aren’t placed on them like they are a drivers license. Ergo, there aren’t laws prohibiting a person from getting married or revoking a marriage because s/he is convicted of a felony.
More than a conceptual problem, there’s also legal precedent that explicitly states that marriage is a right. In 1967, the Supreme Court established marriage as a civil right in their ruling of Loving v Virginia, which struck down state laws prohibiting mixed-race marriages.
It’s one thing to say you disagree with gay marriage because you think it should be between a man and a woman. I and now the majority of the population believe otherwise; that the genders of the two parties involved are moot so long as the love and desire for companionship is present. But to deny it on the basis that it’s not a right of the general population but rather a privilege that the government can claim ownership to and arbitrarily revoke is wrong, both in the moral and literal sense.
Share it!
16 Responses to Marriage is a right, not a privilege
Leave a Reply
STALK ME
Im not against gay marriage, but is marriage a right? I have the right to not be enslaved, I have the right to make my own opinions. Isnt the “right” to get married like saying I have the right to have a sweet sixteen party? or I have the right to retire, the right to eat pizza. Marriage seems like something you can live a normal life without, unlike freedom, which is a right.
In case you couldnt tell I’m not too sure about marriage for anybody it just seems to me for the most part it isnt needed anymore, just my opinion though. Aside from that I dont really care who gets married to who, or how many people.
“Im not against gay marriage, but is marriage a right?”
It is. That’s the whole point of this post. It’s been established as such by both societal practices and the Courts. Same with voting, which by the criteria you laid out – that you “could live a normal life without” – would fall under the same jurisdiction. But both are rights, and are established as such, so it isn’t really subject to opinion.
On a larger scale, though, your view on what does and doesn’t constitute rights is incorrect. I’m not trying to be dismissive or rude, so don’t take it as such, it’s just that…well, you’re wrong. It’d be like saying you don’t think the sky is blue because what everybody says is blue you say is purple.
Freedom is only a right because our society has decided we can be free to do certain things without causing harm to another person or group of persons. Our society sets norms… for example, having sex with children is wrong and is deleterious to their mental and emotional well being. If you look at Greek and Roman history preceding the Dark Ages, men regularly had sex with young boys because society decided it was okay.
Hey, I may be free to insult somebody, but then they are free to punch me in the face. And so on and so on. Marriage is important because it gives people rights… the right to sit by their partner’s bedside if they are dying. The right to sign documents for their partner if their partner is unable to do so. Marriage gives legal rights to people. Gays and Lesbians should have the same rights as any other human being in this country.
@post #2. I would say that marriage isnt a right at all in the usa. Look at it this way, if I was gay and wanted to get married could I? No. So obviously it has not been determined to be a right by the federal or state govt. Also there is no right to be married in the bill of rights. Its not a right yet, but more of a special priviledge allowed for straight people.
I agree with Kevin. The Supreme Court has established marriage as a right of consenting adults when it struck down anti-interracial marriage laws.
Regarding post #4-Just because gays aren’t allowed to be marry doesn’t mean that marriage isn’t a right. At one time women didn’t have the right to vote, but that didn’t mean that men didn’t have the right to vote. We recognized as a society that the right to vote should be extended beyond our traditional definition. Likewise, while I support gay marriage, two people of the same sex getting married had been totally outside the historical and traditional definition of marriage in the United States. Now, we are extending that right.
Excellent points Kevin. Though, frankly, I think anyone who wants to get married, arguably a dying institution, is nuts.
Thanks Kevin for citing Loving v. Virginia. I urge all to take a read and put it into 2011 perspective.
@4. So if a city ordinance was passed tomorrow stating that you no longer have the right to reproduce without permission from the city, that’d be ok?
The right to reproduce (i.e. prohibiting forced sterilization, specifically, which extended into other waters I have no intention of going into) was not included in the Constitution, but the Supreme Court has affirmed that right.
I’m not sure if I agree that marriage is a right. But I do not believe it is acceptable to restrict the “privelage” (if that’s what you consider it to be) to only a select set of adults. Everyone is entitled to apply and test for a driver’s license when they reach a set age. If they abuse the “privelage”, DWIs, reckless driving, etc. they may have the “privelage” revoked. If marriage is a “privelage” everyone over a certain age should be able to be married. If they abuse the “privelage” i.e. strings of divorces, spousal abuse, etc. The “privelage” should be revoked. We all know countless people who are on their 3rd or 4th marriage – why hasn’t their “privelage” been revoked? Maybe because it is a “right” after all. Hmmmm….
Tom J, you might want to research the 14th Amendment and Loving v. Virginia before you dig yourself any deeper. Additionally, Chief Justice Earl Warren stated in the above 1967 case that: “The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men”. This is in regards to marriage between man & woman; There is no ruling yet on same sex marriage.
Loving is huge in this conversation. I wrote about it here: http://www.rogerogreen.com/2010/10/05/l-is-for-loving-day/
My favorite parts involve the lower court arguments:
From the trial judge:
“‘Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.’”
The Lovings lost at every court, with the primary reasoning being that “because its miscegenation statutes punish equally both the white and the Negro participants in an interracial marriage, these statutes, despite their reliance on racial classifications, do not constitute an invidious discrimination based upon race.”
Slightly off topic here, but I do think it’s awfully hypocritical that many advocates of same-sex marriage also support the current prohibitions against polygamy. How is THAT marriage equality? If it’s a right for homosexuals, then it should be a right for everyone. I would have to do some research since I’m not sure where many organizations stand on this issue, such as the ACLU, but I don’t think it is at all a valid argument to state that polygamy constitutes unfair discrimination on the basis of gender. Nor is it fair to refer to it as a selfish predatory practice. What is a right for one is a right for all, which brings us back to the 14th amendment as I mentioned in an earlier post. Without getting into the argument of constitutionally protected cultural practices, the bottom line is that marriage equality should apply to citizens of all practices and diversities, not just same sex marriage.
I guess what’s lost in stating all these opinions is that the LEGAL defintion of marriage is between a man and a woman.
That being said, men and women do have the RIGHT, presently to marry… same sex do not have the right to marry, but there’s no law prventing them from living together/common law…
Hounder – I believe that the idea of polygamy, while theoretically equitable, has proven to be more exploitative than the society would like. This is not to say that monogamous relationships cannot be that way as well. But polygamy is placed in the same category as bestiality and sex with minors.
Why is it that the only polygomy we see in America are wacko religious men with multiple wives and not an atheist woman with multiple husbands? Because the root of polygamy is male sexism and exploitation. It is rightly categorized as deviant behavior.
Can anyone explain to me why, when a discussion on same sex marriage comes up someone invariably brings up polygamy or worse yet, bestiality? Apples and oranges people. Because I am gay and want to marry my partner of 18 years, I now have to support polygamy? Gay marriage is legal in several states and nations and to my knowledge, no one has demanded the “right” to marry their harem or their horse for that matter.
Jeffrey, I can see why someone interested in having more than one husband or wife might bring it into the conversation… if they all were agreeing to marrying the same man or women, but I guess it always turned out that the men were sick, manipulating, using sob’s.
It’s not like a rich, well educated man or women was willing to take care of all these people out of love and the good of their heart.
I think some would draw simularities from having the freedom to do whatever you want in this country, if the others involved agree… ?
The specific comment was about “why not polygamy?” The answer was for the same reason bestiality is not legal, i.e., an exploitative relationship. I for one was NOT making the case against gay marriage, and in fact have been clear elsewhere that I support gay marriage.