California Supreme Court Considers Proposition 8

Print Friendly

Yesterday’s hearing in California’s Supreme Court was a mixed bag: the justices seemed to lean toward upholding the state’s ban on so-called “same-sex marriage,” but they were equally leaning toward upholding the “marriages” that were performed during the time such unions were legal in California.

The justices expressed their desire to uphold the will of the voters as expressed by 52 percent of the voters who passed Proposition 8. At the same time, the judges seemed to be hung up on whether to hold as valid the nearly 20 thousand “same-sex marriages” that were performed after the justices ruled last May that the ceremonies were a constitutional right. They now have 90 days to issue their ruling.

Some of the judges tried to establish that same-sex couples still have the constitutional rights of married couples; the only thing Proposition 8 did, one judge seemed to be arguing, was to avoid changing “the label of marriage.” She asked whether gays and lesbians would be “left with nothing.” Several of the judges seemed worried that thousands of “families that had formed” would be left “unmarried.”

Others who were arguing for “same-sex marriage” seemed to be trying out a new approach. They tried to distinguish between an amendment to the constitution (which has to be voted on by the people) and a revision (which, they argued, required only action by the legislature or a constitutional convention). Others argued that the state should get out of the “marriage business” entirely if the state was not going to “let everyone get married.”

Those who supported the ban, Proposition 8, were encouraged after the hearing, but those who opposed it are undeterred. Their stated intention, reiterated often during the hearing, is to keep coming back until they “eventually prevail.”

What many Americans don’t seem to understand is that one side or the other will “eventually prevail.” So many people seem to think that the issue will just “go away” or that one “win” will end the controversy.

Marriage is the prize of victory for the homosexual activists; they are determined to see their lifestyle endorsed and mainstreamed by “same-sex marriage.” Until they accomplish that goal, they will continue to feel like “outsiders” and they will feel “condemned” by society; their intention is to so normalize their behavior and attitudes that there will be no societal censure or condemnation and thus, they think, no reason for feelings of guilt.

Those of us who support the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman believe that traditional marriage is the cornerstone of the family and the foundation for a strong nation. We in this nation that was founded on liberty cannot and will not stand silent while the courts override the will of the people. We in this nation that was founded on Judeo-Christian values cannot and will not stand silent while the courts overturn the moral principles that have been at the heart of every faith throughout history. God will not be mocked and we, His people, trust in His grace in this and in all circumstances.

Janice Shaw Crouse, Ph.D. is the Director and Senior Fellow, Concerned Women for America’s Beverly LaHaye Institute

Leave a Reply