Tuesday, July 11, 2006
More On Gay Marriage
The majority decision, written by Judge Robert S. Smith, more or less said that marriage has traditionally been between opposite sexes -- and, until the legislature decides differently, it should stay that way. Reading the decision induces vertigo from page after page of circular reasoning.
Richard Cohen likes last weeks New York Court of Appeals ruling on same-sex marriage:
Judge Smith does suggest one salient point: As unjust as the present situation is, it should be the New York legislature's obligation to fix it, not the courts. This strikes a chord with me, since if we have learned anything in the 33 years since the Supreme Court insisted on the right to an abortion, it is that it's sometimes better to have such advances based on legislative, as opposed to judicial, decisions.
Richard Cohen doesn't know anything about the law:
Yet the case for same-sex marriage is so much clearer and easier to make than the complexities that produced the tortured reasoning of Roe. It is based primarily on the easily understood and widely accepted words of the Declaration of Independence: "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
Last time I checked, the Declaration of Independence isn't a law. It's a declaration of independence. Neither the U.S. Constitution, not the New York State Constitution mentions the word "happiness" in it. Thus happiness can't be used as a Constitutional barometer.