McCain, Graham, & Lieberman on Marriage Equality

-First. Senators Lieberman and McCain make the claim that the issue of marriage equality should be left up to the states vis-a-vis the tenth Amendment to the United States constitution. The People who hold this view should, as such, also be against the federal Defense of Marriage Act. The problem is that they are NOT against DoMA They are talking out of both sides of their mouths as hypocrites tend to do. Also, in terms of the states rights argument, when we are talking about civil liberties, that does not really hold water. How many states would still have slavery if we waited for states to nullify that practice? how many states would have Jim Crow laws still on the books? How many states would still have interracial marriage as illegal? How many states would not allow women to vote?

-Second. Senator Graham mentions religion. The problem here is that America is not a theocracy, so ones religious view in terms of law are essentially moot.

-Third. Senator Graham then goes on to conflate the issue of marriage equality for same-sex couple with polygamy. Since there is currently no legal grounds for polygamy whereas we currently have established marriage rights for two people, again the question Graham poses is moot (Straw Man). Polygamy is a separate debate. 

-Fourth. Senator McCain also brings up religious beliefs. I have mentioned this in previous blog posts but I will mention it again. While yes some people's interpretation leads them to be AGAINST marriage equality, there are some whose interpretation leads them to be FOR marriage equality. Thus, banning marriage equality goes against their religious beliefs. In other words, BANNING MARRIAGE EQUALITY INFRINGES UPON PEOPLE'S RELIGIOUS FREEDOM. Again, we have right-wing hypocrisy. Social conservatives argue for their own religious freedom but against that of people with other religious beliefs.

-Fifth. Senator Graham, like many of his compatriots on the right, advocates for voting on marriage equality. The problem with having the majority vote on the rights of the minority is that the minority has an inherent disadvantage. This is what history tells us. The founder were keenly aware of the possibility of this in a democratic society when they were forming this nation. There is a term for this phenomenon: majority tyranny. The right has been advocating this for years when it comes to LGBT equality. The fact that Graham is for this shows that he has little understand of the founders' intentions.

-Lastly, Senator Lieberman mentions that in his state of Connecticut where marriage equality is the law, there has been no substantive change except that same-sex couples have the same legal rights (at least at the state level, remember DoMA) as their heterosexual counterparts. I could not help but notice that the Republicans flanking him said nothing against that statement, probably because he is right. In places where marriage equality is the law, the marriages and rights of those against equality have not changed, but the lives of same-sex couples have been bettered. That is the real point of all of this, and that is why marriage equality should be the law EVERYWHERE.