I am a published historian, conservative activist and public servant. My publications include a chapter entitled "The Aftermath," in Lepanto by G.K. Chesterton and The Centennial History of Holy Rosary Parish: 1904-2004 Reading, PA. I am a contributor to The Federalist. I serve on the Board of Directors of the Italian-American Cultural Center of Pennsylvania. I was elected a Reading School Director in 2005, serving until 2009, and then was appointed to the Board of Directors to fill a vacancy in 2013. I was appointed to the Reading Planning Commission in 2014 and elected Chairman in 2017.
Same-Sex “Marriage” Is Not a “Privilege or Immunity” under the Constitution
A federal United States judge recently ruled in striking down California’s ban on gay marriage that there is a previously-unknown federal right under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution to have one’s marriage to whomever one wants be recognized by the state.
In light of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas' brilliant concurring opinion in McDonald v. Chicago, the right to keep and bear arms case, it is necessary to explore whether or not gay marriage is a right under the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. “Privileges and immunities” is another way of saying “freedoms and rights.” See my July post, A Conservative Federalist Commentary on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms Ruling, in which I explain why this clause in the Amendment is controlling, not the Due Process Clause. The Privileges and Immunities Clause requires states to guarantee those pre-existing natural law rights endowed by our Creator that the states recognized under their own constitutions at the time of their ratification.
The institution of marriage has always been recognized by the States as between one man and one woman. Therefore, there is no right that requires a state to recognize any other relationship as a marriage, as it is neither a privilege nor immunity under a state constitution. Thus, the federal constitution does not require states to recognize a right to same-sex “marriage” or any other “marriage” between any individuals other than one man and one woman.