Posted by
Roxanna M. on Monday, May 19, 2008 10:18:03 AM
The California Supreme Court began this train wreck by declaring that the "right" to marry is one of the "basic, inalienable civil rights guaranteed to an individual by the California Constitution", even though the word marriage is not mentioned in the California Constitution. You know, just like abortion not being mentioned in the United States Constitution, but being a "right" anyway.
On page 113 of the opinion, the court stated: Although defendants maintain that this court has an obligation to defer to the statutory definition of marriage contained in section 308.5 because that statute -- having been adopted through the initiative process -- represents the expression of the 'people's will', this argument fails to take into account the very basic point that the provisions of the California Constitution itself constitute the ultimate expression of the people's will, . . ." (Emphasis added)
The California Supreme Court didn't create gay marriage with its ruling. At page 53 it states that it recognized the fact that plaintiffs were "not seeking to create a new constitutional right -- the right to 'same-sex marriage' -- or to change, modify, or (as some have suggested) 'deinstitutionalize' the existing institution of marriage. Instead, plaintiffs contend that, properly interpreted, the state constitutional right to marry affords same-sex couples the same rights and benefits -- accompanied by the same mutual responsibilities and obligations -- as this constitutional right affords to opposite-sex couples." (Emphasis added)
In other words, if the California Constitution were "properly interpreted", gay marriage would already be legal.
Therefore, since all the court did was "properly" interpret the California Constitution and since the California Constitution is "the ultimate expression of the people's will", then it is now and always has been the will of the people that gay marriage be legal in California.
I had no idea that I was in favor of gay marriage before I was against it. I am ever so grateful to the Supreme Court for setting me straight.