USA: Prop 8 / Defense of Marriage Act Updates 3/22/13

Written by scott on March 22nd, 2013

Prop 8Just a trickle this morning on the Prop 8 / DOMA front. We’ll start with an article form Slate, explaining the latest strategy from marriage equality opponents:

As the Supreme Court prepares to hear Hollingsworth v. Perry and United States v. Windsor, opponents of same-sex marriage have scrambled to answer the central question: What is the government’s rational interest in preventing gays from marrying? The standard argument from moral disapproval was revoked by Romer v. Evans and Lawrence v. Texas. The argument that gay marriages undermine the family has been debunked by a decade of same-sex marriage in several countries. So, as Proposition 8 and DOMA wound their way through the courts, gay marriage opponents lit upon a more durable argument, seemingly grounded in science rather than animus or religion. Their case, presented most comprehensively by Princeton professor Robert P. George, is that only sex acts with a “dynamism toward reproduction”–that is, penile to vaginal intercourse–create true marriages and lead to legitimate child-rearing. Same-sex marriages, by this theory, are not “real” marriages, because they do not involve “organic bodily union.”

Why do they always have to flaunt their sexuality in public?

Defense of Marriage ActOver at the Advocate, they’re reporting on a brief filed by 42 athletes and sports figures against Prop 8:

The brief was spearheaded by Brendon Ayanbadejo of the Baltimore Ravens and Chris Kluwe of the Minnesota Vikings, who were both honored by GLAAD last weekend for their outward support of LGBT rights. Supporters of the brief include openly gay retired athletes, Robbie Rogers, Esera Tuaolo, Wade Davis, Jr., David Kopay, as well as out Minnesota Lynx player Seimone Augustus. “Athletes are learning that they can no longer say ‘I am not a role model’–that they are forced to be a role model and privileged to be a role model, and that their words and actions, no matter how innocently intended, are magnified for both good and bad,” the brief reads. “If the Court reverses the Ninth Circuit, many professional athletes will take their cues from that. And that will cause a ripple effect as even more people follow their role models, their leaders, their heroes.”

Hit the link above for the full list of signers.

And Politico reports on marriage equality momentum and the vanishing middle ground:

As recently as 2008, both major-party presidential nominees had nearly the same public position on marriage: let there be civil unions, not gay marriage, and let each state set its own policy. That was a safe view for pro-gay Democrats and moderate Republicans alike. Today, that position is fully acceptable only to a diminishing slice of the electorate. For supporters of gay marriage, it looks like an insulting, separate-but-equal proposition. For opponents of same-sex unions, it’s an invitation to a chaotic patchwork of laws governing an immutable human institution.

Voters also want the issue decided at the federal level, not on a state-by-state basis, the article notes.

4 more days.

 

1 Comments so far ↓

  1. Laurie Palmer says:

    If the Justices rule against gay marriage, it will prove that they are not objective, but that they are a political body. I pray that doesn’t happen because everyone has a right to love whomever they want, and raise a family if they choose, without being bullied or belittled.

Leave a Comment





1 Trackbacks / Pingbacks

  1. Welcome to the Gay Marriage Watch daily summary of the latest marriage equality news | MasterAdrian2nd