A little sanity is r…

A little sanity is returning to the same-sex marriage issue.

Two state supreme courts dealt same-sex marriage a pair of setbacks today, as the Arizona panel refused to hear a case brought by two homosexual men, and California justices, in hearing arguments in a San Francisco case, appeared to disapprove of the city’s mayor issuing licenses to couples of the same gender.

Arizona make the common-sense determination that the Massachusetts courts don’t make Arizona law. Questions posed by the justices in the California case make it sound like they disapprove of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom’s actions.

Questions from the justices during the two-hour session lead observers to believe the panel would not rule to approve Newsom’s action, saying such a decision would give local officials the option of choosing which laws they want to follow.

“Wouldn’t that be setting a problematic precedent?” asked Justice Joyce Kennard. “Presumably, other local officials would be free to say … I don’t like that particular law, be it a ban on guns” or another issue.

These are pretty obvious rulings that shouldn’t have gone anywhere in the first place. But gay activists will just keep trying until they find a sympathetic judge.

“Although the majority of Americans consistently oppose same-sex ‘marriage,’ homosexual activists have filed lawsuit after lawsuit in an attempt to find radical judges who will tear down democratically enacted laws and impose a radical, nation-changing agenda on an unwilling public,” [Gary] McCaleb [of the Alliance Defense Fund] said.

And check out this quote:

One lesbian activist put a positive spin on the court session.

“I am very hopeful, based on the nature of the court’s questions and their sensitivity to this issue, that they could craft a solution where they would find the mayor exceeded his authority without finding that the marriages are invalid,” Kate Kendell, executive director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, told the Associated Press.

Basically she’s hoping for a multiple-personality ruling; he broke the law, but he should be allowed to get away with it. Thank you Ms. Kendell for your commitment to the rule of law.

Filed under: Uncategorized

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!