Gay Marriage And The Constitution

Photo credit: Times of Malta
While in Malta I was reminded of much of the stigma and continued persecution many gay and lesbian people face. In London we are lucky to be in a society which embraces difference. Yet even in progressive countries like the U.S., and liberal states like California, we have the pernicious evil that is Prop 8.

I believe in equal rights for everyone, and also believe that we will have it soon, so that this gay and straight divide when it comes to marriage will eventually be seen as a quaint anachronism of the early 21st century. I just wish it were now.

The Wall Street Journal has a great article arguing for equality for gay people in a human rights context, and eloquently expresses how nasty a piece of legislation Prop 8 really is. A recommended read in full, but here are some choice quotes:

...basic constitutional rights cannot depend on the willingness of the electorate in any given state to end discrimination. If we were prepared to consign minority rights to a majority vote, there would be no need for a constitution.

...the ban on permitting gay and lesbian couples to actually marry is simply an attempt by the state to stigmatize a segment of its population that commits no offense other than falling in love with a disapproved partner, and asks no more of the state than to be treated equally with all other citizens.

The argument in favor of Proposition 8 ultimately comes down to no more than the tautological assertion that a marriage is between a man and a woman. But a slogan is not a substitute for constitutional analysis. Law is about justice, not bumper stickers.