The Dissenting Opinion To American Same-sex Marriage Judgment And Its Reference

In OBERGEFELL v.HODGES,Chief Justice Roberts made a strong retort to majority opinion for the legitimacy of same-sex marriage in the United States.He stated that the right to define marriage should be preserved by states and the definition of marriage should be regulated or amended by legislative process through elected representatives instead of from lawsuits by attorneys.Roberts stated the same-sex marriage is not a constitutional right but a choice.Roberts held the opinion that core definition of marriage should be the union of a man and a woman and such definition was from the standpoint of history.If a same-sex couple has the constitutional right to marry,why wouldn't the same reasoning apply to other marriage forms that far differ from same-sex marriage? Roberts viewed this would lead to more social and religious problems.This case has significant reference to China that the precondition to change marriage institution should be “respect that marriage is the union of opposite sex”,and the institution of marriage should be changed through legislation process.The legalization of same-sex marriage is improper in present China.