Gay Marriage in California

I didn’t realize this was even on the agenda, but it’s fairly big news:

Divided California Supreme Court legalizes same-sex marriage
By Howard Mintz and Denis Theriault
Mercury News
Article Last Updated: 05/15/2008 09:31:19 PM MDT

…In a ruling that is certain to inflame the social, political and moral debate over gay marriage, a divided state Supreme Court dominated by Republican appointees on Thursday struck down California laws that restrict marriage to heterosexual couples. The 4-3 ruling, written by Chief Justice Ronald George, found that it is unconstitutional to deprive gays and lesbians of the equal right to walk down the aisle with a government-issued marriage license in hand.

So far, God has not racked the state with earthquakes or struck down homosexuals with lightening. Neither have heterosexuals swarmed the divorce courts or abandoned their children. The American family survives.

I do wonder, though, whether it’s necessary to move beyond “domestic partnership” to “marriage.” The article notes, “State lawyers have argued that California’s strong domestic-partnership laws essentially already provide equal benefits to same-sex couples.” It’s done now, though; I’ll be interested to see if the ruling lasts.

I’ll also be interested to see how the Republicans respond to this. They can energize their evangelical base, but at the cost of younger independents. I don’t think it’ll make any difference in the race for the White House — the Democrats seem hell-bent on running losers — but at the broader level and in the longer term, the Dems seem ready to continue to take advantage of GOP infighting between the evangelicals and everyone else.

Diana Hsieh has a nice explanation of why marriage should be extended to homosexual couples but not beyond that. Last year I wrote a lengthier article covering similar points.

One thought on “Gay Marriage in California”

  1. Some of us liberty-oriented purists view any kind of “license” with suspicion, or worse.

    And a marriage permit is even more repugnant to freedom of choice and association than a self-defense permit.

    To top it off, the disgusting truth is that the only REAL purpose of that paper is coercion and theft — whether they be welfare and similar OPM bennies, or infringements on the freedom of contract.

Comments are closed.