In California, where the battles for Marriage Equality continues through the courts, the opponents are seeking to have thrown out of court a lawsuit challenging Proposition 8. The backers of ban claim that the vote was constitutionally valid because the proposition approved by voters ‘furthers the state’s goal of fostering “naturally procreative relationships” ‘ – i.e. undermines conventional marriage, a claim at the heart of the opposition, and which we have heard ad infinitum.
The learned judge wanted to know more. He asked the legal team defending the proposition, and so the ban, to clarify just how gay marriage interfered with this goal of fostering procreative relationships. The answer? We don’t know.
The judge not only refused but signaled that when the case goes to trial in January, he expects Cooper and his legal team to present evidence showing that male-female marriages would be undermined if same-sex marriages were legal.
My reading of the ensuing exchanges had Cooper just digging himself deeper and deeper into the shit.
Walker pressed on, asking again for specific “adverse consequences” that could follow expanding marriage to include same-sex couples. Cooper cited a study from the Netherlands, where gay marriage is legal, showing that straight couples were increasingly opting to become domestic partners instead of getting married.
“Has that been harmful to children in the Netherlands? What is the adverse effect?” Walker asked.
Cooper said he did not have the facts at hand.
“But it is not self-evident that there is no chance of any harm, and the people of California are entitled not to take the risk,” he said.
“Since when do Constitutional rights rest on the proof of no harm?” Walker parried, adding the First Amendment right to free speech protects activities that many find offensive, “but we tolerate those in a free society.”
Deciphered: The backers of Prop 8 have no rational basis for their position. Back to the drawing board, Team 8.
Enjoy reading more at: