One judge stretched the constitution to suit his own agenda. It is no surprise that a gay judge in San Francisco would claim that gays suddenly have a right to marry they have not had in the several thousand year old tradition of marriage, but to declare that suddenly gender does not matter is a bit of a stretch.
In fact, the judge relied on Lawrence v. Texas in part, but as Justice O’Connor’s concurrence in that case points out (and granted it was a concurrence),
That this law as applied to private, consensual conduct is unconstitutional under the Equal Protection Clause does not mean that other laws distinguishing between heterosexuals and homosexuals would similarly fail under rational basis review. Texas cannot assert any legitimate state interest [in its sodomy laws], such as national security or preserving the traditional institution of marriage. Unlike the moral disapproval of same-sex relations-the asserted state interest in this case-other reasons exist to promote the institution of marriage beyond mere moral disapproval of an excluded group.
That the judge was a Reagan and GHW Bush appointee is a red herring, considering judicial picks at the district level have long required the approval of the senators from those states.
The Republican primary has moved into disgraceful territory with the candidates more focused on who can out guard uteruses from coat hangers and children from seeing two guys kissing than jobs and education.
But Handel’s statement is on the money. This was a liberal judge rejecting the vote of 7 million people on nebulous constitutional grounds. We should also keep in mind that 3/4 of the states, enough to pass a federal constitutional amendment, have already banned gay marriage.
I would hope the next step is for Deal and Handel both to support a legislative effort to petition Congress for a federal constitutional amendment. The votes are already there in the state legislatures. If liberals want to keep amending the constitution through the court system, we should reciprocate by, in Thomas Jefferson’s words, binding them from mischief with the chains of the constitution.