Prop 8 Rally / Photo credit: Staffordvaughan

I find the debate about Proposition 8 fascinating.

It has so many real philosophical questions about the nature of mankind, about civil rights, about our constitutional process, about morality in a diverse society, about the nature of freedom, and about demography, all of which will be touched on but not thoroughly addressed in our cable news society.

The way I look at it, the debate over gay marriage poses challenges to our society from a practical, political and process perspective.   Let me explain:

Process:  Proposition 8 was voted on by the people of California.  Backed by the Mormon and Catholic churches, this proposition banned gay marriage in the state of California.  A federal judge, who happens to be gay, ruled yesterday that that law was unconstitutional.   That one person, who obviously has a vested interest in ruling a certain way, has the ability to overturn the will of the people of a state, is a problem, process-wise.  Now, that judge’s ruling will be appealed to an Appellate Court, and then, presumably to the Supreme Court, where it will be argued and then re-argued.  But this is not an isolated incident.  It has happened in almost every location where the people have had a chance to speak.  They don’t want gay marriage.   The Judicial Branch seems to have disdain for the will of the people.   And to me, that presents a bigger problem to our Constitutional system.  It seems very unlikely that the Founding Fathers would have even dreamed of including a right for gay people to marry somewhere in the Constitution.  So, for judges now to read into the Constitution that a gay marriage ban is unconstitutional seems to me to more of an opinion than a ruling with any real legal backing.  Read more...