Proposition 8 ruled unconstitutional, violates 14th Amendment

From the CNN article on this recent decision by a federal judge in California:

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license," Walker wrote in his decision. "Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples."

I am sure those who have listened to the opposition to gay marriage and arguments presented by that side and find them unconvincing will probably find this judgment ring true. If our law is going to be a proper reflection of our culture, protect the rights of minorities against the tyranny of the majority, and actually “secure the blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity” then it will have to be rational.

No single argument for banning gay marriage to this day has been rational.

In fact, the most compelling arguments banning gay marriage would instead ban the institution of marriage itself!

"Big surprise! We expected nothing different from Judge Vaughn Walker, after the biased way he conducted this trial," said Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage. "With a stroke of his pen, Judge Walker has overruled the votes and values of 7 million Californians who voted for marriage as one man and one woman."

Right, because majority rule has ever been a good or proper guide for morality. How many people across the world would have voted in favor of enslaving minority groups across many eras of our past? Those majority groups were as immoral then as they are immoral now. Your might in numbers does not make you right.

If each of those seven million Californians who voted would like to present their best argument for defining legal marriage as “between one man and one woman” they’re welcome to do so. If even a single one of those seven million manages to produce a valid, sound, and convincing argument then we have something to talk about; otherwise one or seven million bad arguments doesn’t amount to anything: zero times seven million is zero.

Those seven million people should instead stop, drop, and think. What if any one of them had seven million people arguing that they didn’t deserve to marry the one they loved because they said so, not because it would be reasonable to say so, would they still just lie down and accept it? What parts of their lives would they actually accept majority rule when the outcome would be both irrational and harmful?

Probably not many.

Link, via CNN.