There’s little doubt that the Supreme Court’s order today irresponsibly declining to stay the federal-district court order against Alabama’s marriage laws signals that at least five justices have already made up their mind to concoct a constitutional right to marry a person of the same sex. Who needs briefing or oral argument anyway, when you’re just making it up? And why give careful thought before redefining the central social institution of American society in a way that denies the fundamental connection between marriage and responsible procreation and childrearing? Gee, what could go wrong?
Ed Whelan, National Review Online
This is an OpEd, got it. But the verbal tantrums being thrown by people who don’t like the fact that gay people exist, is frankly…..embarrassing to me as an American.
“Making it up?” This from the camp that can’t even get their premise to pass the ‘rational basis’ test….the most lenient bar of legal scrutiny. Whelan appropriately notes that their does not exist a Constitutional right to marry someone of the same sex. Guess what genius….there isn’t such a right for someone to marry anybody, regardless of their sex. There also doesn’t exist a Constitutional right to bar someone marrying the same sex.
There does however, exist the concept that rights and privileges of society will not be withheld from a citizen, where it does not cause undue harm or restriction upon another citizen. In other words, until Whelan’s side of the argument can [not even prove] but illustrate where gay marriage harms any member of society….they’ve been legislating based on their emotional desires/fears. When those like Whelan levy the claim of ‘redefinition’…they cast it in an absurd façade that correlates gay marriage with a demise of hetero marriage and procreation.
Don’t like gay marriage? Go it. Nobody is forcing you to “accept it”, to use their own words. You are expected however, to respect a fellow citizen exercising the same rights and privileges that you are……if you style yourself as one who places a premium on individual liberty.