This semester I am in a US Constitution class with hands-down the best professor I've ever had in my college career; Professor Ira Carmen. He's a genius, pushes me to develop my own opinions about the constitution, and motivates me to do my best work. Being in his class has made me realize how exceptionally mediocre all of my other professors are.
Recently, both Iowa (last Friday) and Vermont (today) legalized same-sex marriage. The Iowa Supreme Court voided a law banning gay marriage, and Vermont legislature overrode their governors veto of a bill allowing gay couples to marry. Yesterday Professor Carmen expressed his disapproval specifically of Iowa's Supreme Court action, on the grounds that a judges responsibility is not to "create" rights, which is reminiscent of substantive due process. Highlighting the fact that "heterosexual", "homosexual", nor "marriage" is mentioned in the Constitution of the United States, he said that legislatures are there for a reason, and the people should elect representatives to pass laws that reflect their interests.
My personal stance on the issue is that same sex marriage should be legalized through the legislative process, however his points were a new line of thought that I had never considered, the notion that marriage itself is not even a fundamental right. What do you think?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment