At the end of the day, whatever the motives of its Proponents, Proposition 8 enacted an utterly irrational regime to govern entitlement to the fundamental right to marry, consisting now of at least four separate and distinct classes of citizens: (1) heterosexuals, including convicted criminals, substance abusers and sex offenders, who are permitted to marry; (2) 18,000 same-sex couples married between June and November of 2008, who are allowed to remain married but may not remarry if they divorce or are widowed; (3) thousands of same-sex couples who were married in certain other states prior to November of 2008, whose marriages are now valid and recognized in California; and, finally (4) all other same-sex couples in California who, like the Plaintiffs, are prohibited from marrying by Proposition 8.I've yet to hear an argument that is believable as to why gay marriage harms heterosexual marraige. In my view, allowing two people, consenting adults, to marry no matter their sex, elevates the institution. And, I have seen with my own two eyes, some gay married relationships that are shining beacons of what's good about marriage.
There is no rational justification for this unique pattern of discrimination. Proposition 8, and the irrational pattern of California’s regulation of marriage which it promulgates, advances no legitimate state interest. All it does is label gay and lesbian persons as different, inferior, unequal, and disfavored. And it brands their relationships as not the same, and less-approved than those enjoyed by opposite sex couples. It stigmatizes gays and lesbians, classifies them as outcasts, and causes needless pain, isolation and humiliation.
It is unconstitutional.
By comparison with some of the loathsome marriages I've seen in the heterosexual community, I stand by my conviction. Allow gays to marry. There's no harm, and in fact their example may fix what's broken about heterosexual relationships.
Here's the link to the court web location for official updates.
No comments:
Post a Comment