Yesterday the California Supreme Court upheld Proposition 8, the controversial referendum which amends the state constitution to declare marriage as only between a man and a woman. On the plus side, the Court ruled that same-sex marriages created during the time period when it was legal remain valid. Naturally, the whole idea of Prop 8 is repugnant; freethinkers and civil libertarians are greatly distressed at how such a thing could have happened in Califonia, of all places. What kind of weird, upside-down country is this where states like Iowa and Maine (no offense to those fine places) can get ahead of the Left Coast?
I won’t win many friends by saying that the Court made the right decision–”right” as in, the Court did its job in the face of intense pressure. Prop 8, as unethical, immoral and stupid as it is, is a valid amendment to the state constitution implemented according to the proper procedures. There have been cries of “Unconstitutional!” and “Do the right thing!” but in the end, we should want our Courts to do their job. The justices are not supposed to be on anybody’s side. They’re on the side of the law. They’re referees, while the voters of California are the combatants.
Unfortunately, Prop 8 doesn’t contradict any obvious clause in the federal constitution, and even if it contradicted another part of the California constitution, all things being equal, how could the justices choose between equally valid clauses? It’s a kind of Sophie’s Choice that, to my knowledge, no state supreme court has ever had to address, and probably never will.
So, rather than fuss and fret and insist that the court should have done something outside their authority, we need to hitch up our pants, admit the fundies beat us fair and square, and figure out how to reverse this injustice. (Actually, the way forward is pretty clear, since Prop 8 need only be invalidated by a future ballot initiative, which I’m sure will pass the next time around.)
Dude. Seriously?
Ok- what is being afforded here is that rights, incentives and legal status is being given to some individuals but not others.
The problem is that we haven’t attributed the status of “gay” as something inalienable, therefore eliminating the option to marry someone of the opposite sex as an option. As it stands, gay people can still get married- just not to each other.
The real battle that needs to be won is for your internal sexuality(be it homosexual, heterosexual or transgender) to be definable and declarable as something that gives you a legal basis to say “I do not have the option to marry the people who you have singled out for me to marry”.
Here’s a hack however- file court papers for a name/gender change. You don’t have to change your actual name, but you can legally change your gender. In some states(Texas) you have to show cause, but any counselor can provide this for you.
Or take a trip to the northeast where people are sane.
Yes, I bet the best chance of reversing Prop 8 is to repeal the amendment, in the same fashion that the Eighteenth Amendment to the federal constitution (Prohibition) was repealed by the passage of the Twenty-First Amendment, sixteen years later.
It may take some time, but I think that a nationwide legalization of and recognition of marriage for gays and lesbians is an inevitability. Or maybe I place too much confidence in the ability of the American people to protect and defend secular ideals of fairness and justice! I know of no valid secular reason not to allow gay marriage that can’t also be argued against allowing heterosexual marriage (economic concerns of employers and insurers, for instance). In the end, all the arguments against it come down to “God doesn’t like it, and we will follow his [presumed] will.” If someone knows of a truly valid secular argument against it, please enlighten me!