Thursday, November 20, 2003

A quick take on the Massachusetts Gay Marriage stuff

I know everyone's weighed in on this, so I'll make it short. If the Supreme Court of Massachusetts wants to be activist in the name of rights, at least do it with your jurisprudential standards first. Declare that laws discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation are now subject to strict scrutiny. But don't say that's there's no rational basis for a law protecting the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman. That's just dishonest.

You can read the decision here. Dennis Teti has an excellent constitutionalist view of the marriage amendment's problems here. And CMC's Matt Spalding, now of the Heritage Foundation (where co-blogger Lauren worked), has some negative comments on the decision here, while Andrew Sullivan has some positive thoughts here (starting at "Equality").

UPDATE: No less than David Brooks has some more positive thoughts on gay marriage (if not the Massachusetts decision) here. John Leo has negative comments here.

No comments:

Blog Archive