Thousands pray in front of Supreme Court about same-sex marriage

Posted on by reportedehoy

Rally frente a Suprema Corte

-In Spanish-

Video Report

On Saturday, April 25 2015, at 12:00PM thousands gathered in front of the Supreme Court of the United States in Washington, DC to pray for the decision to be taken by this court regarding same-sex marriage.

.
The Court will hear arguments on this matter next week.

.

From the early morning hours, thousands of people from various religious denominations boarded buses heading to Washington, DC, from various places in the tri-state area ( New York, New Jersey and Connecticut), as well as other states including Virginia, Massachusetts, Michigan, and Maryland, answering the call of Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage. The buses were donated by this organization and Rev. Eric Salgado of New York.

.
Among the participating religious leaders and elected officials, were Rev. Ruben Diaz, State Senator from New York and President of the Organización de Ministros Hispanos de New York, Rev. Jose Lopez, President of the Hudson County Pastors’ Association, Rev. Julio Maestro, Rev. Nehemias Mercedes, Rev. Jairo Baquero, from Massachusetts, Brother Gerard Snell, from Philadelphia, and Rev. Julio Pichardo, from Long Island.

.
Currently there are 37 state legislatures from all 50 states in the country that have legalized same-sex marriage.

.
Some organizations have challenged this decision in the Supreme Court alleging unconstitutionality. Among the arguments presented are: that the approval of same-sex marriage has been imposed by state legislatures and not voted on by the people; that the Constitution of the United States defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman; and that the Scriptures set forth in various biblical portions that homosexuality is a sin and an abomination before God.

.
The hearings are scheduled to start on Tuesday, April 28 2015 before the judges of the Supreme Court of the United States.

.
The justices will hear extended arguments – scheduled to run 2 1/2 hours, on cases before the court, coming from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio and Tennessee, all of which had their marriage bans upheld by the federal appeals court in Cincinnati in November. That appeals court is the only one that has ruled in favor of the states since the 2013 decision.

.
The 2013 United States v. Windsor decision, which struck down part of the federal law that denied a range of government benefits to legally married same-sex couples, did not address the validity of state marriage bans. But lower courts judges across the country, with few exceptions, said the ruling compelled them to invalidate state laws that prohibited gay and lesbian couples from marrying.

.
Two related issues would expand the marriage rights of same-sex couples. First, do same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry or can states continue to define marriage as the union of a man and a woman?

.
The second is must states that won’t allow same-sex couples to marry recognize same-sex marriages from elsewhere?

.
Same-sex marriage supporters argue that state laws that allow only men and women to marry violate the Constitution’s guarantee of equal protection under the law and make second-class citizens of same-sex couples.

.
States argue that they have always set the rules for marriage and that voters in many states have backed, sometimes overwhelmingly, changes to their constitutions to limit marriage to a man and a woman.

.
They say a lively national debate is underway and there is no reason for courts to impose a solution that should be left to the political process. The states also argue that they have a good reason to keep defining marriage as they do. Because only heterosexual couples can produce children, it is in the states’ interest to make marriage laws that encourage those couples to enter a union that supports raising children.

.
If the court strikes down the state bans, the ruling would invalidate the remaining anti-gay marriage laws in the country. If the court limits its ruling to requiring states to recognize same-sex unions, couples in states without same-sex marriage presumably could get married elsewhere and then demand recognition at home.

.
If the court rules for the states on both questions, the bans in 14 states would survive. Some states that had their marriage laws struck down by federal courts might seek to reinstate prohibitions on gay and lesbian unions.

.
The more than six thousand ‘protestants’ in front of the Supreme Court on Saturday, had a clear and simple request from the court: Allow marriage to continue as established by God and defined in the Constitution of the United States: the union between a man and a woman.

Leave A Response