The California Supreme Court is scheduled to release its decision at 10 AM Pacific time today in the gay marriage cases (formally known as In re Marriage Cases, S147999). (You can access the opinion here when it is available.) This decision may resolve the conflict between voter-supported Proposition 22 (recognizing marriage as between a man and a woman) and the City of San Francisco, which (for a short time) issued marriage licensed to gay & lesbian couples, under the direction of Mayor Gavin Newsome.
There doesn't seem to be any obvious indicators as to how the California Supreme Court will rule. Six of the seven justices were appointed by Republican governors, which suggests a more conservative approach; however, California Republicans tend to be less conservative than other states, so a "conservative" decision is by no means assured. The California Supreme Court has not been socially conservative in past "gay rights" cases, such as requiring equal treatment for same-sex parents in custody disputes; yet this same court invalidated Mayor Newsom's order to issue licenses to gay couples and invalidated all licenses issued. The Court was reported to be sharply divided in its March hearing.
So what will happen in an hour or so? My guess is that the California Supreme Court will reach a compromise decision whereby it recognizes that formal legal recognition of marriage is reserved to a man and a woman only. At the same time, the Court will likely rule that gays and lesbians have certain rights (akin to marriage) under the state Constitution. In other words, a middle-of-the-road ruling that infuriates both sides and pleases neither.
Signatures have been submitted by conservatives to qualify a proposition for the November 2008 ballot which would amend the state Constitution to include Proposition 22-like recognition of marriage as between a man and a woman. Gay activists will likely challenge the ballot measure at every turn, and if it qualifies and remains on the ballot, a major battle will begin with its culmination in November.
And to all of this I say: so what?
Obviously, the biblical concept of marriage is one man, one woman, one time. Nothing in the Bible comes even remotely close to endorsing any type of marriage other than one man, one woman, one time.
Yet look at what has been done to marriage long before the gay marriage question reared its head. There is little if any difference in the divorce rate among evangelicals as compared to society at large. Marriages fail at an astounding rate, as well as second and third marriages. It doesn't seem to me that heterosexuals have done all that good a job at recognizing the sanctity of marriage, and the church has done even worse.
Please don't get the idea that I am endorsing gay marriage or "civil unions" or anything of the sort. I'm not. The Bible doesn't recognize gay marriage, Western law and philosophy doesn't recognize gay marriage, and society as a whole doesn't want gay marriage. My point is that evangelicals need to put just as much effort into preserving the sanctity of marriage in the church as they do in "protecting" marriage against gays and lesbians.
"Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother's eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye." (Matthew 7:5, NIV)
|