<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8' ?>
<!--  If you are running a bot please visit this policy page outlining rules you must respect. http://www.insanejournal.com/bots/  -->
<rss version='2.0' xmlns:lj='http://www.livejournal.org/rss/lj/1.0/'>
<channel>
  <title>Dancing in the Moonlight</title>
  <link>http://moondancer.insanejournal.com/</link>
  <description>Dancing in the Moonlight - InsaneJournal</description>
  <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 07:59:20 GMT</lastBuildDate>
  <generator>LiveJournal / InsaneJournal</generator>
  

<item>
  <guid isPermaLink='true'>http://moondancer.insanejournal.com/1276234.html</guid>
  <pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2008 07:59:20 GMT</pubDate>
  <title>The Pursuit of Happiness</title>
  <link>http://moondancer.insanejournal.com/1276234.html</link>
  <description>I have often referred to this phrase from the Declaration of Independence in my discussions on marriage equality. In response to comments I made in another journal, someone recently questioned whether or not the Declaration could be used in legal arguments.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; From Wikipedia (that world-renowned source of reliability :D):&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; &lt;blockquote&gt; &lt;p&gt;The phrase &quot;pursuit of happiness&quot; appeared in the 1967 Supreme Court case, &lt;i&gt;&lt;a title=&quot;Loving v. Virginia&quot; href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia&quot;&gt;Loving v. Virginia&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/i&gt;, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), which focused on an anti-&lt;a title=&quot;Miscegenation&quot; href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscegenation&quot;&gt;miscegenation&lt;/a&gt; statute. &lt;a title=&quot;Earl Warren&quot; href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Warren&quot;&gt;Chief Justice Warren&lt;/a&gt; wrote:&lt;/p&gt; &lt;dl&gt; &lt;dd&gt;&lt;i&gt;The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.&lt;/i&gt;&lt;/dd&gt; &lt;/dl&gt; &lt;p&gt;The phrase is used in the depression-era case &lt;i&gt;&lt;a title=&quot;Meyer v. Nebraska&quot; href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meyer_v._Nebraska&quot;&gt;Meyer v. Nebraska&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/i&gt;, 262 U.S. 390 (1923), which is seen as the seminal case interpreting the &quot;liberty&quot; interest of the &lt;a class=&quot;mw-redirect&quot; title=&quot;Due Process&quot; href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Due_Process&quot;&gt;Due Process&lt;/a&gt; clause of the &lt;a class=&quot;mw-redirect&quot; title=&quot;14th amendment&quot; href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_amendment&quot;&gt;14th amendment&lt;/a&gt; as guaranteeing, among other things, a right to the pursuit of happiness, and, consequently, a right to privacy.&lt;/p&gt; &lt;/blockquote&gt; &lt;p&gt;If &lt;i&gt;Loving v Virginia&lt;/i&gt; cannot be considered relevant in any question of marriage equality, then I do not know what can be. As a member of the pagan clergy, I fully support the right of any committed, adult&amp;nbsp;persons to engage in the rites of marriage (regardless of gender sexual orientation or, for that matter, number.)&lt;/p&gt;</description>
  <comments>http://moondancer.insanejournal.com/1276234.html</comments>
  <category>marriage</category>
  <category>civil rights</category>
  <category>public post</category>
  <category>equal protection</category>
  <lj:mood>contemplative</lj:mood>
  <lj:security>public</lj:security>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
