“The majority of the court held that sexual orientation is not a suspect class, that there is no scientific consensus that orientation is immutable, that marriage does not discriminate based on gender, that there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage, that laws defining marriage as a union of husband and wife are substantially different from those banning interracial marriage, and that the historic link between marriage and procreation justifies the state's definition of marriage as a union of husband and wife.”

SSM [same-sex marriage] has lost in every state high court to consider the issue since the stunning success in Goodridge in Massachusetts in 2003... When you consider that SSM legal advocates have carefully chosen the most sympathetic venues since Goodridge, this record of losses is especially significant. It means that strong anti-SSM precedents are being created in the friendliest states, making pro-SSM rulings in other states even more unlikely in the near future... If SSM is to advance much in the near future, it will probably have to come legislatively.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm an avid reader, and a big fan of your collumn. I think it is great that you keep abreast of anti-gay legislation, because quite frankly, I don't have the time to do it myself, and your collumn typically keeps me up to date.

So I was fucking SHOCKED to read amendment 3 on my ballot when I went to vote saturday.

I'm in florida. There was an amendment on there to "define marriage as being only between one man and one woman".

It never made the news, anywhere? I was amazed to see it there, without some form of public outcry. (Obviously I voted against).

There's been so much talk about prop 8 in California, that no one has noticed Amendment 3 in Florida.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Again, kudos to CT and its Supreme Court.

In 2005 the CT Legislature enacted a civil union law for same-sex couples and in 2008 the CT Supreme Court voted in favor of marriage equality.

As a Justice of the Peace I look forward to officiating at the marriages (formerly civil unions) of same-sex couples now too.

Good luck CA.

Cheers,
Joe Mustich, Justice of the Peace
Washington CT 06793 USA

I also look forward to "upgrading" my own civil union to a marriage very shortly.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]