California's Supreme Court
legalizes gay marriage. Here's
the text of the decision (ht/
VC).
Will the use of the judiciary to enact the (somewhat semantic given California's strong civil union law) social change weaken the decision's permanence and lead to another round of state-level reaction? Will it spark the California
constitutional amendment backlash being discussed?
Will the "California Effect" seen in state policy and products operate on this level, rippling out across the country?
Will it
help McCain? He voted against the federal Defense of Marriage legislation, agreeing with
Jonathan Rauch,
Dick Cheney, and supposedly Obama and Clinton, that states (state legislatures, in McCain's view) should determine such policy. Personally, I believe that arrangement is the best option at the current time.
Operating within that federalist scheme, McCain himself, though, supported a marriage ban in his own state of Arizona.
Here's
an interesting Politico post on the thoughts of both McCain and Obama on the California development. For all his progressive inclinations, Obama stops short when it comes to gay marriage, falling short of
the eloquent, hopeful standpoint of an alum of this blog, David L. Politico notes:
Obama's campaign also noted, in a different way, their candidate's view that states should decide. What Obama didn't say is that he's opposed to gay marriage (note the phraseology of first sentence) "Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as President. He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage. "Because Obama is not where the far left wants him to be (marriage) and McCain not where the far right wants him to be (a federal ban), this is not something either will probably make front and center. This strange situation might be the best thing for the country. Having two candidates who are not fire-breathing standard bearers for their respective sides in a social war will, I hope, temper and rationalize debate, ultimately resulting in steady, positive social evolution rather than drastic, counterproductive revolution in either direction. Yet I admit it might very well do just the opposite - the lack of standard-bearers may instead inflame grassroots radicalism.
As I've suggested several times before on this blog, I think the country as a whole is in for a significant change in the electorate's outlook on individuals who don't identify as heterosexual within the next one to two generations. I don't believe the many state constitution bans on gay marriage passed in recent years will last very long. Instead, I predict a rather Prohibitionesque lifespan for many.
Labels: Barack Obama, California, gay marriage, gay rights, individual rights, John McCain, law
|
