Why is gay marriage unconstitutional

On June 26, , the United States Of America become the twenty-first and most populous country to legalize same-sex or gay marriage following the Supreme Court's ruling in Obergefell v.

The court ruled that the denial of marriage licenses to same-sex couples violates the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. According to a news report by NY Times , married gay couples will now enjoy the same legal rights and benefits as married heterosexual couples and will be recognized on official documents such as birth and death certificates. Thousands of same sex couples supporters thronged the premises of the Supreme Court to celebrate the ruling, proudly waving rainbow flags and banners with the Human Right Campaign's equal sign, which have come to represent the gay rights movement.

In , the High Court struck down a federal anti-sex marriage law. David R. Why same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. By David R. Usher November 22, The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.

See RenewAmerica's publishing standards. Usher David R. There is no single place in the Constitution including any assorted amendments you wish to toss in that says that the institution of marriage cannot be restricted to only monogamous heterosexual couples. Neither is it true that there is legal precedent in the United States of course to indicate that such would be illegal. So alas, I challenge YOU to prove that the banning of gay marriage is illegal. Pro My argument is not that it's technically impossible for them to pass a gay marriage ban, only that a close examination and -given the current arguments- a law against gay marriage is unconstitutional.

The reasoning behind a law is crucial, obviously that determines if a law should or should not be passed. The Scopes Monkey Trial, and the later case of Epperson v.

Arkansas were both concerned about the teaching of evolution in schools. The theory of evolution had been banned because of religious reasons by local authorities. But the Supreme Court, in the Epperson v. Arkansas, overturned those laws, saying they violated the separation of church and state. Bans on teaching evolution were made solely because they contradicted with the church, and it is unconstitutional to make a law based only on that.

The constitution doesn't say anything about restricting marriage, but if the only reason it is being banned is because the church says so than it doesn't pass. There needs to be secular evidence against gay marriage otherwise a ban is a violation of separation of church and state.

Those in traditional marriages will pay taxes that will be used to support feminist marriages where child support or welfare cannot be recouped, as occurs in our existing welfare state. Traditional marriages have only two income sources, neither of them entitled or tax-free.

Heterosexual marriage will be heavily burdened by costly marriage penalties, and be comparatively unattractive to women. Men in male-male marriages will be forced to pay child support to women in feminist marriages and become economically enslaved to these women.

The taxpayer will be forced to pay for child support some men cannot afford to pay, as occurs in our existing welfare state. Feminist marriage will fully eviscerate the close-scrutiny Constitutional meaning of equality based on sex.

The impact of feminist marriage on crime and social violence over time will be profound. Hundreds of peer-reviewed studies demonstrate that men whose behavior is not tempered by heterosexual marriage are the most likely to end up uneducated criminals earning a living in the underground economy.

Men have no pressing reason to marry each other. Few will marry, as demonstrated by same-sex demographics in Massachusetts, where at least two-thirds of same-sex marriages are between women. Converting the illegitimacy metric into feminist marriage does not change the socioeconomic construct or ameliorate the known social consequences.

Feminist marriage will unquestionably drive very substantial increases in problematic social trends and taxpayer costs with which we are already besot.