In his superb 136 page ruling, Judge Vaughn Walker detailed each of the arguments presented by the proponents of Prop. 8 and judiciously shot each of their arguments down, making it very difficult for the U.S. Supreme Court to find in favor of those proponents.
The following is an excellent article that deserves to be read in its entirety, part of which reads as follows:
This is how the judge shot down each one of the rationales the proponents set forth for denying gays the right to marry:
Reserve marriage as only a union between a man and a woman.
- Judge: Tradition alone cannot form a rational basis for a law.
Proceed with caution when implementing social changes.
- Judge: "Because the evidence showed that same-sex marriage has and will have no adverse effects on society or the institution of marriage, California has no interest in waiting and no practical need to wait to grant marriage licenses to same-sex couples."
Promote opposite-sex parenting over same-sex parenting.
- Judge: The evidence shows "beyond any doubt that parents' genders are irrelevant to children's developmental outcomes." Proposition 8 has nothing to do with children; it simply prevents same-sex couples from marrying.
Protect the freedom of those who oppose marriage for same-sex couples.
- Judge: Proposition 8 does not affect any First Amendment right or responsibility of parents to educate their children, or the rights of those opposed to homosexuality or to same-sex marriage.
Treat same-sex couples differently from opposite-sex couples.
- Judge: Proposition 8 creates an administrative burden on California because it must maintain a parallel institution for same-sex couples.
Any other conceivable interest.
- Judge: Proponents have not identified any rational basis that Proposition 8 could conceivably further.
A private moral view that same-sex couples are inferior to opposite-sex couples is not a proper basis for legislation, the judge said. Thus, he held, "Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license."
To the proponents' arguments that the purpose of marriage is procreation, Walker retorted, "Never has the state inquired into procreative capacity or intent before issuing a marriage license." Moreover, the fact that a majority of California voters supported Proposition 8 is irrelevant, according to Walker, who wrote that "fundamental rights may not be submitted to [a] vote."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLEASE CLICK ON THIS LINK TO READ JUDGE WALKER'S COMPLETE RULING ON PROP. 8.
No comments:
Post a Comment