"Well, it was great while it lasted."
It's easy to think something like that after the Supreme Court halted same-sex marriages in Utah--barely two weeks after the first ones were consummated in the Beehive State.
On the surface, it almost seemed surprising that Utah allowed same-sex unions even for such a brief period. After all, when you say "Utah" to most people, the first word that comes to their minds is "Mormons."
The Church of Latter-Day Saints, not surprisingly, does not want to encourage same-sex unions. But, as I mentioned in an earlier post, in Salt Lake City--the State's capital and largest city--a higher percentage of same-sex couples raise children than in any other city in the nation. Ironically, it is a result of the city's and state's social conservatism: People there come out later in life, often after siring or birthing a child in a heterosexual marriage.
Judge Robert Shelby--a conservative Republican--ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. He consulted with a number of professionals, including clergy people, who assured him that allowing same-sex marriage has absolutely no effect on whether opposite-sex couples consummate their unions in marriage before having children. Nobody could have been more succinct when he said "no one is harmed" when people marry others of the same sex.
State officials succeeded in having his ruling overturned by abandoning their earlier claims that heterosexual marriage encourages "responsible" sex and procreation. Instead, they made one of the most bizarre arguments I've ever heard.
In essence, they drew upon earlier Supreme Court decisions supporting "diversity" as a criteria in deciding who may attend public universities. They said, in essence, they were pursuing "diversity in marriage."
It's almost funny to read that such an argument was made in one of the whitest states in the Union. Perhaps someone else--say, a Supreme Court judge--will see it that way and Utah will follow California in legalizing gay marriage, overturning it and re-instating it. Perhaps the last part of that process won't take as long in the Beehive State as it did in the so-called Golden State.
It's easy to think something like that after the Supreme Court halted same-sex marriages in Utah--barely two weeks after the first ones were consummated in the Beehive State.
On the surface, it almost seemed surprising that Utah allowed same-sex unions even for such a brief period. After all, when you say "Utah" to most people, the first word that comes to their minds is "Mormons."
The Church of Latter-Day Saints, not surprisingly, does not want to encourage same-sex unions. But, as I mentioned in an earlier post, in Salt Lake City--the State's capital and largest city--a higher percentage of same-sex couples raise children than in any other city in the nation. Ironically, it is a result of the city's and state's social conservatism: People there come out later in life, often after siring or birthing a child in a heterosexual marriage.
Judge Robert Shelby--a conservative Republican--ruled that the state's ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. He consulted with a number of professionals, including clergy people, who assured him that allowing same-sex marriage has absolutely no effect on whether opposite-sex couples consummate their unions in marriage before having children. Nobody could have been more succinct when he said "no one is harmed" when people marry others of the same sex.
State officials succeeded in having his ruling overturned by abandoning their earlier claims that heterosexual marriage encourages "responsible" sex and procreation. Instead, they made one of the most bizarre arguments I've ever heard.
In essence, they drew upon earlier Supreme Court decisions supporting "diversity" as a criteria in deciding who may attend public universities. They said, in essence, they were pursuing "diversity in marriage."
It's almost funny to read that such an argument was made in one of the whitest states in the Union. Perhaps someone else--say, a Supreme Court judge--will see it that way and Utah will follow California in legalizing gay marriage, overturning it and re-instating it. Perhaps the last part of that process won't take as long in the Beehive State as it did in the so-called Golden State.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment