In the wake of the California Supreme Court decision to strike down the state’s provisions recognizing only traditional marriages, Pajamas asked me to offer my thoughts on the topic. I offer the first few paragraphs here:
Earlier today, holding current “statutory provisions” limiting “marriage to opposite-sex couples” unconstitutional, a divided California Supreme Court overturned the state’s retention of the traditional definition of the institution. In short, the court mandates that the Golden State recognize same-sex marriages.
The court found the existing domestic partnership legislation affording same-sex couples “virtually all of the same substantive legal benefits and privileges” and imposing “virtually all of the same legal obligations and duties” violated the state’s equal protection clause.
As a gay man who supports the ideas the institution of marriage embodies, I should be pleased and to some degree, am grateful that this issue has received the attention it is getting, but feel nonetheless troubled by the decision. To be sure, the court makes some valuable arguments about the merits of recognizing same-sex unions, but, I believe those arguments should be made to the citizens of the Golden State, 62% of whom voted in 2000 to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.
Now that I’ve whet your appetite, click here to read the rest of the post.