In a very odd turn of affairs, two old adversaries have joined together in the fight to repeal Proposition 8 in California. Ted Olson who represented G W Bush and David Boies who represented Al Gore in the Supreme Court case, Bush v Gore have challenged California’s ban on same –sex marriage after the California state Supreme Court upheld on May 26, 2009 the results of the November 2008 vote. The Court sustained a voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage, but determined that the nearly 18,000 couples married in the window while it was legal in California would remain legally married.
The two attorneys hold that,
“It’s our position in this case that Proposition 8 …denies Federal Constitutional rights under the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Constitution…the Constitution protects individual rights that cannot be taken away by a vote…We believe that denying individuals in this category the right to lasting, loving relationships through marriage is a denial to them, on an impermissible basis, of the rights that the rest of us enjoy.” Olson went on to say, “I also personally believe that it is wrong for us to continue to deny rights to individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
“It’s our position in this case that Proposition 8 …denies Federal Constitutional rights under the Equal Protection and Due Process clauses of the Constitution…the Constitution protects individual rights that cannot be taken away by a vote…We believe that denying individuals in this category the right to lasting, loving relationships through marriage is a denial to them, on an impermissible basis, of the rights that the rest of us enjoy.” Olson went on to say, “I also personally believe that it is wrong for us to continue to deny rights to individuals on the basis of their sexual orientation.”
Wow, whouda thunk it. For so long it has been the argument of straight friends of mine (maybe not friends exactly) that this vote was the will of the people and that is what the country was founded upon. OK, they are right, to a point, but Olson has it right when he points out that rights guaranteed in the Constitution cannot be abrogated by a vote. This protects minorities from the ‘tyranny of the majority’. I remember somebody said that once – that’s why I put it in quotations.
There has been, as you can imagine a deluge of discussions, rants arguments and flame wars on the web ever since the vote with tempers running at a fever pitch. I have tried to be the voice of reason when I weighed in on YouTube arguments and all I really have to say is this – many folks are quoting the Bible as a means to justify the vote and just as many are saying the Bible and religion have no place in this case. I am a Christian (as you will find out as we go along-but not the ‘regular’ kind) and I have my opinion about what place religion has in this argument. However, the bottom line is this - and I have had lots of fun using this line over and over-
Same sex marriage is an idea whose time has come, in fact, it’s coming to a neighborhood near you. Maybe not tomorrow, maybe not next week, but soon, very soon. It is a juggernaut that is approaching and we are not going to be turned around or diverted again – EVER.
I am reminded of one of my favorite poems by the juggernaut analogy… “And what rough beast, its hour come round at last, / Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?” You know, after writing it down, I’m not sure I want to liken the same sex marriage movement to a ‘rough beast, slouching’ anywhere, but I like the poem and I’m leaving it in. Give the RW’ers a little fodder.
Anyway, back to the lawsuit. Finally, Olson’s and Boies’ suit argues that the ban violates the federal right for same-sex couples to marry guaranteed by the Constitution and also requests that the that U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to mandate that same-sex couples be allowed to marry while the case is pending. Apparently the attorneys are prepared to take the case to the US Supremes if necessary. We all (well, maybe not all) hope it won't come to that, but we will follow it wherever it goes.
