OUR VIEW: More to think about in same-sex debate

The Judge Shelby ruling on Dec. 20 no doubt threw the state of Utah a curve ball. We broke a record for marriages, but reopened a can of worms the country has been fighting for years.

As the editorial staff of the newspaper, we feel it’s important to bring to light a discussion for our audience and take a stand on the controversial issue at hand. We’re not talking about whether the LGBT community should have the right to get married. We’re speaking about a broader, larger, more important debate – the same debate our country fought a civil war over in the 1800s and struggled with during the 1950s and ’60s.

Is marriage a civil right? The Supreme Court failed to take a stand on the issue. They struck down parts of the Defense of Marriage Act in June 2013, but specifically left it up to the states to decide. Doesn’t that make Shelby’s ruling unlawful? At face value, yes; but not if marriage is a civil right. Those rights should never be determined by a majority ruling. If they were, African Americans would probably still be segregated and given second-tier status.

What we desperately need is a ruling on whether or not marriage is a civil right, not the Supreme Court copping out yet again like they did on Monday when they sent the appeal back to the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

If same-sex marriage is a civil right, then it is not an issue individual states can decide on. If it is, however, the $2 million the Utah Attorney General’s office estimates it will spend fighting to keep Amendment 3 might be worth it. However, if the state intends to throw $2 million at a state rights issue, they might consider throwing an extra few million dollars in other places that affect a lot more people, like better air quality or education.