HomosexualityThu Aug 23, 2012 - 5:40 pm EST
Mexican judge orders state to perform homosexual ‘marriages’
August 23, 2012 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Mexican federal court judge has ordered the state of Oaxaca to perform homosexual “marriages” based on a recent constitutional amendment prohibiting discrimination based on “sexual preferences.”
The nation’s Supreme Court is now reviewing the right of the government of Oaxaca to contest the ruling. The case would likely end up in the Supreme Court for a final verdict.
According to second district judge Roque Leyva Gustavo, the current law must be overridden because “homosexual couples are given a different treatment in the same situation, because they are not permitted the right to contract marriage, without valid reasons to justify it, while the reasons given are based simply on sexual preferences.”
Leyva Gustavo denied that permitting homosexuals to “marry” would threaten the institution of marriage, because society has accepted “diverse” definitions of the family, and the institution has become secularized.
“Marriage between people of the same sex is not a threat or opposition to the conservation of the family, because the transformation and secularization of marriage and of society has resulted in a great diversity of forms constituting a family, which does not arise necessarily from marriage between a man and a woman,” the judge wrote.
Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.
According to national media sources, the federal courts will have to contend with another article of the nation’s constitution, which implies that marriage is between a man and a woman and that the government has a legitimate interest in defending the institution of the family.
“Men and women are equal before the law,” states article 4 of the nation’s charter. “This will protect the organization and the development of the family.”
The ruling also contradicts the state of Oaxaca’s own civil code, which states that “matrimony is a civil contract celebrated between a single man and a single woman, who unite to perpetuate the species and to give mutual aid to one another in life.”
The ruling cannot be enforced while the matter is under review by the Supreme Court, which reportedly took the case in response to a request from minister Jorge Pardo, one of the Court’s eleven justices.
“There is the possibility of analyzing how the rights of equality, identity, and non-discrimination must be protected regarding sexual preference and, of course, the extent of the protection of the family contained in the fourth article of the Constitution,” the Supreme Court reportedly stated.