I'm not quoting the Times' piece, for obvous reasons.
William Jacobson's got a post up already, "Split Decision on Prop. 8" (via Memeorandum):
The California Supreme Court has issued a split ruling, upholding Proposition 8 but also upholding the validity of gay marriages which took place prior to passage of Prop. 8.Andrew Pugno, one of the authors of 2000's Proposition 22, which was struck down by the California Court last year, offers his perspective at the Times' opinion page today, "'You Just Can't Just Change Marriage ...'." Gay marriage is not demographically inevitable:
Today's younger voters will be tomorrow's older voters. Their views will likely evolve as they have children of their own.I'll have more later. As noted previously, I'm interested in the backlash on the left.
This issue has been so strongly debated that there are very few people who are undecided. And very few people's opinions will change. The polls indicate that, since election day, there has been no continued slide in the percentage of voters who want to protect marriage for a man and a woman.
I think the argument that gay marriage is inevitable is completely wrong. I think we are headed toward what you see in Europe, where traditional marriage has been protected but there are alternative relationships recognized by governments to provide benefits and protections. That will be the equilibrium that we will ultimately find.
But for now, Towleroad is blogging, "California Supreme Court Upholds Proposition 8." Also, Joe. My. God., "Prop 8 Upheld - Bigotry Rules In CA."
Pam's House Blend has the text of the ruling, "California Supreme Court Ruling - Upheld Prop 8 - Marriages Preformed Last Year Still Valid."
Now, let the leftist hate-fest begin!
**********
UPDATE: Via Memeorandum, the New York Times reports, "California Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Same-Sex Marriage."
See also, the Los Angeles Times, "Prop. 8 Upheld by California Supreme Court."
No comments:
Post a Comment