Friday, August 06, 2010

Rational basis for marriage

A San Francisco federal judge says that there is no rational basis for marriage being between a man and a woman. If you want to see the contrary view, you can read the high court opinions in other states. For example, the dissents in Connecticut explain it clearly.

Here is a CNN video about a counseling student being kicked out of school for her religious views on homosexuality. It is amazing to see someone defend the thought police police on TV. The argument that her personal beliefs disqualify her from being a counselor are silly. She could have personal beliefs about war, drug use, dogs, adultery, and an assortment of other topics, and those beliefs could conflict with those of her patients, but no one claims that she cannot study counseling for any of those reasons.

The US Supreme Court has also ruled against same-sex marriage already in Baker v. Nelson 1972, and in older cases:
Murphy v. Ramsey, 114 U.S. 15, 45, 5 S.Ct. 747, 29 L.Ed. 47 (1885) (recognizing “the idea of the family, as consisting in and springing from a union for life of one man and one woman in the holy estate of matrimony; the sure foundation of all that is stable and noble in our civilization”).
Here is a summary of part of that CT dissent:
Justice Zarella used the rational basis test to examine the state's marriage laws. He determined that the state's interests in promoting and regulating procreative conduct are legitimate and limiting marriage to opposite sex couples is rationally related to the advancement of those interests. The interests he suggested could have motivated the legislature were that:

1. the power of biological ties means that heterosexual families are most likely to achieve stability and successfully perform the childbearing function;

2. children do best when they are raised by a mother and a father;

3. the benefits and social status associated with traditional marriage encourage men and women to enter into a state of long-term, mutually supported procreation that is conducive to procreation and responsible child rearing on the part of biological parents; and

4. limiting marriage to a man and woman accomplishes vital social goods, while the institution of civil union promotes the legitimate interests of those who enter into it
A Zarella excerpt is also here.

No comments: