| 翻訳と辞書 |
| Former U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions ： ウィキペディア英語版 |
Former U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions
Many U.S. states enacted amendments to their state constitutions which prevented the recognition of some or all types of same-sex unions, but all such amendments were struck down by the Supreme Court of the United States on June 26, 2015, in the case of ''Obergefell v. Hodges''. Some amendments prevented a state from legalizing same-sex marriage, civil unions and domestic partnerships, while others banned only same-sex marriage.〔Virginia's amendment also banned private contracts that are marital in nature, while Hawaii's amendment merely gave the state the ''power'' to ban same-sex marriage.〕 By May 2012, voters in 30 states had approved such amendments.〔(【引用サイトリンク】url=http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/regions/americas/united-states/120509/amendment-one-how-it-changes-north-carolina-law )〕 While the actual text of these amendments still remains written into the various state constitutions, the ''Obergefell'' decision has rendered them unenforceable insofar as they prevented same-sex couples from marrying.
Conservative activists who favor such amendments may refer to them as "defense of marriage amendments" or "marriage protection amendments." These state amendments are different from the proposed Federal Marriage Amendment, which would ban same-sex marriage in every U.S. state, and Section 2 of the Defense of Marriage Act, more commonly known as DOMA, which allowed the states not to recognize same-sex marriages from other states.
==History==
The idea of extending marriage rights to same-sex couples did not become a political issue in the United States until the 1990s. During that decade, several Western European countries legalized civil unions, and in 1993 the Supreme Court of Hawaii ruled in ''Baehr v. Lewin'', 852 P.2d 44 (Haw. 1993), that refusing to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples was sex-discrimination under that state's constitution.〔"(Special Report: 'I do' )" ''Honolulu Star-Bulletin'' January 22, 1997〕 In response, voters passed Hawaii Constitutional Amendment 2. This amendment differed from future marriage amendments in other states as it did not ban same-sex marriage itself, but merely empowered the state legislature to enact such a ban.〔"(Homosexual (same-sex) marriages in Hawaii )" Robinson, B.A. ''Religious Tolerance''. 1997-JUL-11, updated 2001-DEC-2〕 In November 1998, 69% of Hawaii voters approved the amendment, and the state legislature exercised its power to ban same-sex marriage.〔〔"(Same-sex marriage ballot measures: Hawaii gives legislature power to ban same-sex marriage )" AllPolitics. ''CNN''. November 3, 1998〕 Only three constitutional bans on same-sex unions (in Alaska, Nebraska, and Nevada) were proposed between 1998 and 2003.〔In Alaska, a same-sex couple had sued for marriage rights, and had seen several rulings in their favor; the Alaska ban arose in an effort to prevent the ruling from taking effect. See "(Homosexual (same-sex) marriage in Alaska )" Robinson, B.A. ''Religioustolerance.org''. 2002. (last update 2005-APR-21). accessed November 3, 2006.〕
All three amendments passed. In Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's November 2003 decision in ''Goodridge v. Department of Public Health'', the court legalized same-sex marriage in Massachusetts. Social and religious conservatives feared that their own state supreme courts would issue such rulings at some point in the future; in order to prevent this, they proposed additional constitutional bans on same-sex marriage. The following year, eleven constitutional referenda banning same-sex unions were placed on state ballots.
抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』
■ウィキペディアで「Former U.S. state constitutional amendments banning same-sex unions」の詳細全文を読む
スポンサード リンク
| 翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース |
Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.
|
|