Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest
So, it is okay if a state were to change their laws and once again make it illegal for people of different races to marry? For some odd reason, I thought this fell under civil rights, not state rights. Miscegenation was against the law in several states. The U.S. Supreme Court struck down those laws. Many felt that such marriages were an obscenity and did their best to prevent these marriages, including county clerks refusing to sign the marriage certificates. I see no difference between the Court allowing same sex marriage today and allowing mixed race marriages in the past. there are times when civil rights should trump state rights. That's one of the reasons there was a civil war here.
|
Interesting bit of history worth reviewing. Bill Clinton's Defense of Marriage Act was passed in 1996 2 years before the date cited in Kentucky's Statute that define marriage in the same way. In this case, one might think that Kentucky was only mirroring federal law. Meanwhile, Kim Davis was not enacting laws or changing them. She is now in jail for following her state's law. How do you feel about cities not choosing to follow immigration laws that are Federal Laws? Are they not trumping ( pardon the pun) Federal laws especially since Federal Laws are the law of the land governing immigration.