Legal Threats to Traditional Marriage: Implications for Public Policy : Hearing Before the Subcommittee on the Constitution of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives, One Hundred Eighth Congress, Second Session, April 22, 2004, Volumen4
United States, United States. Congress. House. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on the Constitution
U.S. Government Printing Office, 2004 - 148 páginas
Comentarios de la gente - Escribir un comentario
No encontramos ningún comentario en los lugares habituales.
Otras ediciones - Ver todas
adoption amendment American argue benefits birth cause CHABOT challenge child church civil civil unions claim clause Code cohabitation Committee Congress constitutional constitutional amendment cultural decided decision decline Defense of Marriage define definition denied discrimination DOMA due process effect equal protection federal fundamental gay marriage gender going Goodridge Health homosexual increase individual institution interest issue Joseph judges judicial Justice KURTZ Lawrence legislation legislature lesbian liberty Loving majority marriage licenses Massachusetts meaning Netherlands opinion out-of-wedlock birthrate parenthood parents passed percent persons Petitioners prohibiting public policy question reason recognition recognized relationship right to marry rule same-sex couples same-sex marriage Scandinavia Senate sexual social society spouse STAT statutes Supreme Court Thank things traditional traditional marriage union United University unmarried W.Va welfare West Virginia woman
Página 130 - ... of all the various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of...
Página 74 - (1) The rights and liabilities of the parties with respect to an issue in tort are determined by the local law of the state which, with respect to that issue, has the most significant relationship to the occurrence and the parties under the principles stated in § 6.
Página 126 - Under our Constitution, the freedom to marry, or not marry, a person of another race resides with the individual and cannot be infringed by the State.
Página 41 - The law, however, is constantly based on notions of morality, and if all laws representing essentially moral choices are to be invalidated under the Due Process Clause, the courts will be very busy indeed.
Página 70 - No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
Página 11 - At the heart of liberty is the right to define one's own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.
Página 97 - First, the fact that the governing majority in a State has traditionally viewed a particular practice as immoral is not a sufficient reason for upholding a law prohibiting the practice; neither history nor tradition could save a law prohibiting miscegenation from constitutional attack.
Página 64 - At the same time, the candid citizen must confess that if the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal.
Página 101 - These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.