Friday, August 6, 2010

Marriage As We Know It May No Longer Be


On August 4th, Chief Judge Vaughn Walker of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, declared Proposition 8 had no "rational basis" in a 138 page ruling. Walker struck down the amendment, which states, "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California," on the basis that it violated the equal protection and due process clauses of the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
 
Judge Walker, who is himself an active homosexual, has faced criticism that he may be biased on his view of marriage, even though he has not had a history of a proven biased in homosexual issues. Judge Walker sided with the U.S. Olympics Committee in their copyright infringement case against the "Gay Olympics." However, this decision was not as personal as the legal status of same-sex relationships, which the judge reportedly asserted, were given second class status by Proposition 8.   
 
Judge Walker, in explaining his decision to dismiss the amendment that marriage between a man and a woman is the only valid recognized marriage in California, said, "It's restriction of marriage to homosexual couples was nothing more than an artifact of a foregone notion, that men and women fulfill different roles in civic life." He also added, that it seemed to him proponents of Proponents 8 were defending the amendment on the basis of "moral disapproval." Which, he said, "Is an improper basis to deny rights to Gay men and Lesbians," and enacted in law, "a private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples." He went on to say, "Homosexuals have suffered social and legal disadvantages from stereotypes and misinformation."  
 
Wow! I always thought men and women were biologically different. Each fulfilling a distinct, but very different role, for the continuation of the species. This ruling will be appealed to the 9th Circuit Court and then to the Supreme Court, where Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor are waiting.
 
The 9th Circuit Court is known for its' liberal decisions. The fact that Judge Walker does not want his ruling enforced, but is waiting for a decision on the appeal to the 9th Circuit, speaks volumes. For many of us  we remember the 1973 Roe v Wade Decision, which overturned 42 state's protective laws for the unborn. If appealed to the Supreme Court, this decision would be the Roe v Wade for marriage.

1 comment:

Sir Galen of Bristol said...

"Its restriction of marriage to homosexual couples was nothing more than an artifact of a foregone notion, that men and women fulfill different roles in civic life."

Evidently, civic life must take no notice of who it is that bears children, and believes that it can be either men or women, in either same-sex or opposite-sex relationships. Or, presumably, relationships of larger groups.

Too, Judge Walker's decision will enact in law "a private moral view that same-sex couples are EQUAL to opposite-sex couples." Why is one private moral view acceptable, and the other not?

In Dickens' words, "if the law says that, then the law is an ass."