ILW.COM - the immigration portal Immigration Daily

Immigration Daily: the news source for legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers

Home Page

Advanced search


Immigration Daily

Archives

Processing times

Immigration forms

Discussion board

Resources

Blogs

Twitter feed

Immigrant Nation

Attorney2Attorney

CLE Workshops

Immigration books

Advertise on ILW

VIP Network

EB-5

Chinese Immig. Daily

About ILW.COM

Connect to us

Make us Homepage

Questions/Comments


SUBSCRIBE

Immigration Daily

 

Chinese Immig. Daily



The leading
immigration law
publisher - over
50000 pages of free
information!

Copyright
©1995-
ILW.COM,
American
Immigration LLC.

Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here:



< Back to current issue of Immigration Daily < Back to current issue of Immigrant's Weekly

Dear Editor:
Cyrus D. Mehta's article discussing the impact of gay marriage on immigration law fails to truly address the real impact of gay marriage, not just on our laws but our nation as a whole. Marriage is not defined by government, nor is it defined by society. Marriage, between a man and a woman, existed before human beings established the sort of complex relationships that now characterize society and government. Arrangements such as civil unions exist for the gratification of the parties involved whereas marriage is a God-ordained institution that exists in order to respect the responsibilities and obligations of procreation, and to signify societys recognition of those responsiblities and obligations. Gay marriage has never been a constitutional right in America or any other civilized nation. It is the rogue judges who are trying to create a new right. When one state creates gay marriage all states could be forced to recognize such unions; a consitutional amendment is the only sure way to prevent that from happening. The Defense of Marriage Act was voted by 85 US Senators and 342 Members of the House and signed by President Clinton. It contained the very same language, that marriage in the US shall be between a man and one woman. As a minority, I take deep offense to Mr. Mehtas argument that gay marriage is the moral equivalent of interracial marriage. Homosexuality is an immutable characteristic and a choice. It is an unfortunate attempt to piggyback gay unions on the life experiences of Black Americans in order to advance the cause of gay marriage. As attorneys, we should seek to advance the moral laws upon which our nation and laws were established and not the governances of activist judges. We must abide by the oath we took and uphold what is just and true.

Esther Valdes, Esq.
San Diego, CA



Immigration Daily: the news source for
legal professionals. Free! Join 35000+ readers
Enter your email address here: