can three lesbians marry?

A California judge tonight “refudiated” proposition 8 in California.  There will be much commentary in the news tomorrow, but three initial items struck me as significant.

1.  The judge said that “Proposition 8 harms the state’s interest in equality, because it mandates that men and women be treated differently based only on antiquated and discredited notions of gender.”  What exactly are these “antiquated and discredited notions of gender”?  That seems to be a rather pejorative, condescending, and even arrogant claim.  Is he saying that in the past few years we suddenly became far wiser about gender than most everyone else who has ever lived? 

2. And if any two people, regardless of gender, are sufficient to constitute a marriage, then why stop at two?  If gender doesn’t matter, then why does number?  If number does matter, on what grounds?  How would an argument for gay marriage even begin to mount a case against polygamy?  If gay marriage becomes law (and it surely will), won’t we also have to allow polygamy?  If not, why not? 

3. Many people suspect that the critique of the “antiquated and discredited notions of gender” is ultimately an attack on men.  Some women have shown that they don’t think they need men around.  They can now get pregnant without men, get married without men, and raise their children without men.  They may even think that their children are better off for having two nurturers rather than a nurturer and an authoritarian parent (there’s an antiquated notion of gender for you).  Those excited for the right for homosexuals to marry should pause and consider if “progress” for one group isn’t coming at a high cost to another.

7 Comments

Add yours →

  1. What an amazing statement. I wonder how long it will be before another judge decides that marriage should not be based on the “antiquated and discredited notions of species” or “antiquated and discredited notions of age” or “antiquated and discredited notions of you-fill-in-the-blank.”

  2. Excuse me!?

    “California’s obligation is to treat its citizens equally, not to ‘mandate [its] own moral code.’ (p. 133)” at http://www.scribd.com/doc/35374462/Prop-8-Ruling-FINAL

    Is not the word “obligation” in this context a moral term and is not the insistence upon treating citizens equally a moral presupposition?

    The nose has left the face!!!

  3. One of the “finds of fact” in the court’s ruling is that, “Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians.” (#77, p. 103)

    Where does this road lead us?

  4. It seems that we would be better off getting rid of state-based marriage, as it is seemingly an antiqued notion.

    What about equality for the single person? Why should a single person like me not have the state benefits that a married couple has?

  5. Nate:

    Sounds like we’re guilty of hate speech. How long until a church is penalized or a pastor imprisoned for declaring the Word of God on this issue?

    Dan:

    I’ve often wondered why singles don’t take this up–perhaps they don’t have the same lobbying strength? At least to be fair, the state should allow two singles to form a partnership for the purposes of state benefits. Where does it end?

  6. Mike,
    We don’t have the pity element.

    Also, I think that a lot of what we say about this issue comes out as hate speech is because we forget the “in love” part of “speak the truth in love”.

  7. Dan:

    If it helps any, I pity you. I’m sure that many people who oppose homosexual practice do forget to love them, but I don’t think that would make much differerence. The judge said that we “harm gays and lesbians” because of our “religious beliefs,” not because of how we express them. You could be the love child of Mr. Rogers and Oprah, and if you say that homosexual practice is a sin you would still be accused of hate speech.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: