JUST SAYIN’-In light of this week’s “non-ruling” by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS), which upheld lower-court rulings supporting marriage equality, it is just a matter of time before every state in the union will allow people to marry those whom they love, removing restrictions and obstacles to the process that currently still bars such unions in many states.
Yet, we continue to witness the ramblings of so many hypocrites!! These are the very people who claim that the New Testament supersedes and negates the Old. They are the same people who quote Leviticus to assert unequivocally that marriage must only be permitted and can only be sanctified between one man and one woman.
But look at all the broken rules. The Patriarchs themselves, whom religionists revere, were people who unabashedly practiced polygamy—with multiple wives and a multitude of children. We have laws against that now but many choose to look the other way on interpretations when it is expedient to do so. Similarly, right-wingers conveniently overlook the Holy Book’s demands that divorce is unacceptable while stoning for adultery is. Just how many of those self-righteous conservatives are guilty of both adultery and divorce?
There are countless examples from the Bible, which the “right” loves to quote, that at the same time fly in the face of consistency. Just as mixed racial marriage was illegal and unthinkable not all that long ago, marriage without restrictions is just a matter of time. The opponents to marriage equality are clearly out-of-step.
David, one of the Biblical heroes, is known for his great love for Jonathan, the man he loved more than any woman--the same David that committed adultery, had competitors killed, and married multiple times.
Jesus himself loved his Special Disciple as one would a woman (unless that woman was Mary Magdalene—just a thought).
The drive to legalize same-sex marriage began about twenty years ago, and only 12 years ago marriage equality was legal nowhere in the country. But time stays still for no one. The ACLU is quoted as saying that the SCOTUS action is “a watershed movement for the entire country.” Jon Davidson from Lambda Legal adds, “The Supreme Court has chosen not to stand in the way of love.” Essentially, the Court’s decision to sustain marriage equality (as it has) should be seen as a clear message of its overall leanings on this issue, suggests Virginia’s State Attorney General, Mark Herring.
Last year, SCOTUS overturned DOMA (the Defense of Marriage Act). California’s Proposition 8 ballot proposition’s ban on gay marriage was ultimately struck down as well.
There remains, of course, the question as to whether the U. S. Constitution guarantees the right to marry, but SCOTUS has left that answer principally to the states. How ironic! Those who support states’ rights policies can thank the Supreme Court for basically allowing states to make this decision for themselves and most already have (it seems an inevitability that the remaining few will eventually legislate in the same way—like it or not as Gavin Newsom would say, marriage equality is here to stay).
On the other hand, should a lower court in the near future rule to uphold a ban, that action would generally obligate the Court to hear the case. By that time, however, a vast majority of states will have legalized same-sex marriage either voluntarily or by court order. It is extremely unlikely, then, that the Supreme Court would rattle that cage again. The issue will have become settled case history, so it would be unlikely that the Court would, as conservative as it is overall, turn the clock back.
{module [862]}
{module [662]}
This latest SCOTUS decision was based on seven petitions that had been submitted to it to uphold the respective state bans. Now that the Court has refused to hear these cases, the writing is on the wall. Before Monday’s decision, 19 states and the District of Columbia had made marriage equality legal. The newest decision adds 5 more to that number and leads the way to another 6. When the Ninth Circuit Court decides on its petitions, 5 more states could be added to this list, and if the Sixth Circuit Court decides favorably, another 4 will be mandated to provide certificates of marriage to any otherwise eligible applicants--regardless of sexual identification.
As foreseen not long ago by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (lovingly known as Notorious
R. B. G.), all things considered, the Supreme Court will be moving us forward on this issue. She based her opinion on the “remarkable shift in public perception of same-sex marriage.” She continued, that since we all know gay people—in our families, among our friends and neighbors, our co-workers and bosses, our children’s teammates—we have become enlightened, better informed, and more compassionate. We are becoming people who see that the dreams of others only mirror our own and deserve to be realized.
Soon after her gently stated predictions, the Court lived up to her expectations. Ain’t it grand?!
Just sayin’.
(Rosemary Jenkins is a Democratic activist and chair of the Northeast Valley Green Alliance. Jenkins has written A Quick-and=Easy Reference to Correct Grammar and Composition, Leticia in Her Wedding Dress and Other Poems, and Vignettes for Understanding Literary and Related Concepts. She also writes for CityWatch.)
-cw
CityWatch
Vol 12 Issue 82
Pub: Oct 10, 2014
