Saturday, December 20, 2008

Another controversy over the Marriage Amendment

Just when you think that you have heard all the arguments, the Arizona State Bar Association is proposing to add a reference to sexual orientation as part of the oath taken by attorneys upon admittance to the Bar Association. Membership in the Bar Association is mandatory on all attorneys in the State of Arizona in order to appear and represent clients in court. A recent article explains the issues:

Bar might add sexual orientation to state oath

I will have a lot of comments on this topic. Stay tuned.

1 comment:

  1. From the article: "Our obligation as professionals we view as somewhat broader than the constitutional requirements," --state Bar President Ed Novak

    So does this involve non-constitutional, or even unconstitutional, requirements? Should attorneys be obligated to support something they view as immoral, wrong, and now (in Arizona and other states) unconstitutional?

    Something that I have noticed recently is that before the election the gay-rights people said that gay-marriage was a civil right. The emphasis has now shifted and they are calling it instead a "human right", which means that it is not subject to constitutional law and overrides constitutional law. It is in effect the beginnings of anti-constitutional thought, under the guise of being "broader than the constitutional requirements".