Prop 8 Ruling

The summer has seen challenges to marriage from federal courts on both coasts. Two judges find a right to same sex marriage, but they come at it differently. A federal district court judge in Massachusetts struck down the Federal Defense of Marriage Act in two separate cases. These decisions indicate that Congress should defer to the states regarding their definition of marriage.

Out in California, Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision regarding California’s Proposition 8, still strikes down traditional marriage, but the message is somewhat different: the state does not get to decide. Judge Walker ruled that marriage, defined by a democratic vote of the state’s citizens as the between one man and one woman, violates the United States Constitution and cannot stand.

Judge Walker’s decision marks the first time a federal judge has found a right to same sex marriage in the federal constitution. The decision is being appealed to the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals which means its reach would not be limited to California. The 9^th Circuit has jurisdiction over nine western states, eight of which have constitutional bans on same sex marriage. Every one of these bans could be subject to reversal. A decision at the United States Supreme Court could affect all 50 states. A reversal of Prop 8 would be the Roe vs. Wade of gay marriage.

Something else stands out: In both the Massachusetts cases, and the Prop 8 case the judges concluded that the only explanation for upholding traditional marriage is a simple and ugly one: sheer animus against homosexuals and lesbians. These rulings dismiss that citizens might favor protecting marriage because marriage, in itself, is good. No, he says their motivation is simply... homophobia.

Proposition 8’s defenders contend that marriage rightly serves to direct parents toward the well-being of their children. Judge Walker disagreed, instead arguing, “The gender of a child’s parent is not a factor in a child’s adjustment.” Also..."Having both a male and a female parent does not increase the likelihood that a child will be well-adjusted.”

Radio host Rush Limbaugh, who doesn’t talk much about the gay agenda, said of this decision, “The American people are boiling.” Columnist Peggy Noonan writes, “America is at risk of boiling over.” She gives many reasons but topmost of her concerns is Americans’ concern for our children. She writes: “The biggest political change in my lifetime is that Americans no longer assume that their children will have it better than they did. This is a huge break with the past, with assumptions and traditions that shaped us.” She’s referring to our kids’ economic status. Ruining marriage will certainly affect that. But beyond financial security are other measures of well being. Marriages form families where children are taught to be moral, thoughtful, and, yes, religious citizens. But if we allow the courts to redefine marriage....we diminish our ability to raise them well.