This battle is far from over, but the California Supreme Court issued the correct decision. Marriage is between one man and one woman. Other relationships exist, of course, but they are not marriage. No 'official' has the right to violate the law in redefining marriage against the will of the people as the mayor of San Francisco had done.
The case of a Vermont lesbian couple reported in the Washington Post, one of which had a child via artificial insemination, joined in a civil union in Vermont, then separated, are now fighting about the custody and visitation rights of the child. One point in dispute is which laws govern this situation, those in Vermont where one partner lives , of those of Virginia where the other partner resides.
This dispute points to the need for a constitutional amendment that clearly defines that marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Passing this amendment will not solve all problems, but it will prevent many of the current disputes and court interpretations. Moreover, it will assure the debate is brought closer to the people and not left to the courts.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Quote form the NYT article: "The justices have restored the rule of law in California," said the Alliance Defense Fund's senior counsel, Jordan Lorence, who argued the case before the court in May. "The decision shows that same-sex `marriage' is not inevitable. Same-sex `marriage' loses whenever a state puts it before voters."
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment