Tuesday, April 20, 2010

An appeal to conservatives -- from a prominent conservative lawyer -- to support gay marriage

Ted Olsen, a long-time conservative, is actually leading a legal effort to invalidate California's recent Proposition 8, which bans gay marriage in the state. As he puts it,
"How could a politically active, lifelong Republican, a veteran of the Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush administrations, challenge the "traditional" definition of marriage and press for an "activist" interpretation of the Constitution to create another "new" constitutional right? (Newsweek)
His answer is this endearingly human essay written by Olsen himself, published in Newsweek, January 18, 2010.


Excerpts:
"The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly held that marriage is one of the most fundamental rights that we have as Americans under our Constitution. It is an expression of our desire to create a social partnership, to live and share life's joys and burdens with the person we love, and to form a lasting bond and a social identity. The Supreme Court has said that marriage is a part of the Constitution's protections of liberty, privacy, freedom of association, and spiritual identification. In short, the right to marry helps us to define ourselves and our place in a community. Without it, there can be no true equality under the law. It is true that marriage in this nation traditionally has been regarded as a relationship exclusively between a man and a woman, and many of our nation's multiple religions define marriage in precisely those terms. But while the Supreme Court has always previously considered marriage in that context, the underlying rights and liberties that marriage embodies are not in any way confined to heterosexuals." (Newsweek)

...

"Another argument, vaguer and even less persuasive, is that gay marriage somehow does harm to heterosexual marriage. I have yet to meet anyone who can explain to me what this means. In what way would allowing same-sex partners to marry diminish the marriages of heterosexual couples? Tellingly, when the judge in our case asked our opponent to identify the ways in which same-sex marriage would harm heterosexual marriage, to his credit he answered honestly: he could not think of any." (Newsweek)

...

"No matter what you think of homosexuality, it is a fact that gays and lesbians are members of our families, clubs, and workplaces. They are our doctors, our teachers, our soldiers (whether we admit it or not), and our friends. They yearn for acceptance, stable relationships, and success in their lives, just like the rest of us." (Newsweek)
--
Image by Jamison Wieser, Wikimedia Commons

2 comments:

  1. Welcome to the bloggosphere Per! In keeping with the theme 'pretty decent information', I'll share a related op-ed from the NYTimes. Law Prof. Geoffrey Stone disputes the conservative model of judging, one that is an impartial 'umpire' calling balls and strikes. Judging is not a mechanical application of a concrete and stable constitution. Rather, it is an empathetic work of interpreting the spirit behind the constitution's often abstract language. Here's the link:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/opinion/14stone.html?scp=6&sq=judges&st=cse

    Because, the fight for equal rights to marriage will be decided by judges.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I saw this in your bathroom and thought it was fabulous. Keep up the lovely blogging, Per.

    ReplyDelete