The Odd Couple
Thu ,28/05/2009You all will get to read my rantings for at least the short term on California and the same sex marriage debate. I’ve expressed that this is an issue that is at least a little bit important to me and at the same time, it’s also important to you. Most of you reading this are married heterosexuals. Some of you have been married happily or not for decades, some for just a few years, some a few times. The idea of marriage is typically a goal that humans strive to attain. We are the only species on earth that spends our entire lives looking for that one soul mate to spend our lives with. We are the only species who understands and recognizes the stability and comfort that marriage can bring to each person involved. Our government recognizes these feelings too and throughout history our government has recognized the special significance of human relationships whether they last 75 years, or 75 hours. There are emotional benefits to relationships as well as tangible legal benefits to marriage and they are codified by our government.
Recent events in California have again brought the issue of same sex marriage to the forefront of the ‘culture wars’. 2 very well known lawyers have decided that the time is right to bring a constitutional case for gay marriage to the US Supreme Court under the Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the United States Constitution. The lawyers you will remember from Bush vs. Gore in 2000 and both are from completely opposite sides of the political spectrum. Each of them however believe firmly in the guarantees put out by our Constitution. A portion of their press release is below. Click HERE to read the full release.
Ted Olson: Thank you, Chad. Good morning everyone. Thank you for being here.
I’m Ted Olson, and I’m very, very pleased to be here with my friend and colleague, David Boies. As you heard, we are two lawyers from opposite ends of the political spectrum who have come together to support one of the most important issues of our time. The case we filed on behalf of the individuals that you see before you today is not about liberal or conservative, Democrat or Republican. We’re here, in part, to symbolize that. This case is about the equal rights guaranteed to every American under the United States constitution.
For too long, gay men and lesbians who seek stable, committed, loving relationships within the institution of marriage have been denied that fundamental right that the rest of us freely enjoy.
Yesterday, the California Supreme Court said that Proposition 8 makes it okay for gay men and lesbians to be our neighbors, our friends, our doctors, our lawyers, our parents, our children, our brothers and our sisters, but they can’t get married.
The plaintiffs in this case are Americans. They work hard, they pay their taxes and they want to get married just like many of the rest of us. They simply want to live their lives without being discriminated against by their government. All they want are the freedoms to which they are entitled under the constitution and to which the rest of us so freely enjoy.
Creating a second class of citizens is discrimination, plain and simple. The constitution of Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, and Abraham Lincoln does not permit it. Our nation was founded on the principle that all Americans are created equal. This case is about ensuring that every American is treated equally under the law.
California has created a separate relationship for same sex couples called Domestic Partnerships. That is separate, and that is not equal. It is unconstitutional. Proposition 8 denies people fundamental constitutional rights.
Our courts exist to protect people when their rights are infringed. Citizens of this country, when they’re denied equal rights, turn to the courts for vindication of those rights. That is why we have them.
We’re going to court because people shouldn’t have to surrender their fundamental rights to a popular plebiscite. People should not have to beg to be treated equally, or wait for decades for popular approval to be treated equally. And when people are denied their rights, they deserve a remedy, and the courts are the most direct way to accomplish that.
Now I would like to introduce my dear colleague and dear friend, David Boies.
David Boies: Thank you Ted. It’s a pleasure to be here. I must say that being up here on a platform with Ted Olson and all these lights makes me want to urge everybody to count every vote. [Laughter.] But we are here today for something that is of equal and perhaps even greater importance. Our constitution guarantees every American the right to be treated equally under the law. There is no right more fundamental than the right to marry the person that you love and to raise a family.
The courts exist to reverse injustices. The purpose of our constitution and the purpose of our court system is to make sure that the promise of our constitution is extended to every American. That’s what this lawsuit is about.
The concept of equality, of equal rights and equal justice under the law, is not just in our constitution. I believe it is in the hearts and souls of every American. And we have tolerated discrimination and injustice in the past because we have been blinded to the fact that the person being discriminated against is simply another human being, another American. That blindness has enabled us historically not to recognize the equality of people based on sex, based on race, based on religion, and now based on sexual orientation.
This lawsuit is about the courts saying that no matter how blind people may be, the constitution guarantees that everyone deserves the equal rights that every human being is entitled to. And we go to court because that is the place that those equal rights have been established time and again over the last hundred years. Thank you.
The full press release is worth reading as it addresses some important concerns, chief among them the fact that nearly every major GLBT organization believes that now is not the right time for this case to be brought. That there are simply not enough states on board yet and public opinion is simply not at the critical mass needed to win this sort of case. While I’m inclined to believe that point and I’ve said before that I think the courts ought to stay out of this fight at least while there is momentum in state legislatures to change the system, I do agree with the points that these lawyers are making. Why should I have to wait years for a civil right that has previously been acknowledged in MY constitution? There is no question that there is a civil right to marriage in this country. The question is whether or not that right can be denied to a specific group of people for any specific reason. It is at this point that Americans must make a decision. Are gay relationships similar to straight relationships or are they fundamentally different? Is being gay at all a normal human variance (science says it is) or is being gay a choice (as religion seems to think it is). Those questions are polar opposites but they are fundamental in framing this debate.
Anyhow, I’m not sure yet how I lean on this new federal lawsuit. I’ll be interested in reading the briefs when they are filed to see exactly what is being challenged. I’m inclined to believe that people should never have to wait for civil rights in this country while at the same time, this lawsuit has the potential to be lost which would mean a major set back in the gay rights movement. We are talking years of progress that could be dismantled over night. I’m not sure I’m ready to see all that ground lost. Stay tuned for more posts like this. I have very few other things going on in my life outside of work and following this issue and writing about it keeps my brain functioning.
