Social Satire :: essays research papers

In the United States, there are genuine inalienable rights given to all. As the Declaration of Independence of the original thirteen colonies states, "among these are Life, impropriety and the pursuit of Happiness."(Jefferson, 1787, Declaration of Ind., Pg. 1) These rights are not "special rights." While the U.S. presidential term cannot hold back upon these rights, it does exact the precedent to ratify and enforce lawfulnesss that leave enable or restrict its citizens use of them.As a veridical part of the rights to liberty and the pursuit of happiness, license in ones domestic kins is genuinely important. The freedom to put together ones domestic relationships in ways that better(p) fit ones needs, desires, and life is critical in ones pursuit of happiness. The importance of this freedom to arrange ones domestic relationships freely becomes understandable in versions of the "Defense of trades alliance Act" (DOMA), which is proposed, and some times passed, on the national and state levels. DOMA legislation, in its antithetical forms, limits the legal explanation of marriage to the legal union of a valet de chambre and woman. (Sullivan, 1976, DOMA Act, pg. 2)As the First A workforcedment to the U.S. Constitution states, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...." (Jefferson, 1787, Constitution of U.S., PG. 4) The tradition of Judeo-Christian "marriage" is the life-long heterosexual union of one male and one distaff this definition excludes all other possible combinations. The U.S. government has given itself the power to make this definition of "marriage" (which is a religious establishment) a state definition and to give it special privileges and legal status. The legal status, privileges and other benefits of de jure recognized marriage are withheld from those unions that are different from the traditional union of marria ge. The "benefits" of legally recognized marriage include medical plow and visitation rights, death and distribution of ones estate, child custody and parental rights. Expanding the definition of marriage to include homosexual and heterosexual domestic partners, as certain popular political movements have requested, will not solve this issue. at that adjust are many different ways people can have relationships and to define them all in a state definition would be difficult. Even if this could be done it would still exclude single men and women who choose not to be in such a relationship from these benefits. The just answer is to eliminate marriage as state establishment, and to place it within the private jurisdiction as the definition of religion is.