After yesterday’s ruling from the California Supreme Court that gay marriage could not be banned, the Illinois Review posted a press release from the Alliance for Marriage Foundation. It begins:
The Alliance for Marriage Foundation urged the people of California to constitutionally protect marriage in their state, while calling upon Congress to pass AFM’s federal Marriage Protection Amendment in the aftermath of a California Supreme Court decision striking down marriage.
They almost lost me there, with the absurd idea that permitting gay marriage somehow amounts to “striking down marriage,” as if people in California couldn’t get married any more.
The metaphysical implications are baffling: How can other people’s marriages diminish mine? I really don’t get it. As far as I’m concerned, some state could legalize human-to-livestock marriages, and my own marriage would feel no less secure.
Anyway, the rest of the article goes on to make what might be a slightly better point: The courts have no business inventing a right to gay marriage. That should be left to the voters of California and their elected representatives.
Of course, those same voters and their representatives ratified the California constitution, which includes language opposing discrimination because of sexual orientation.
Leave a Reply