• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • With Marriage on Ballot in Four States This Fall, Prop 8 Supporters Seek Supreme Court Review

    Earlier this week, supporters of Proposition 8, the 2008 California marriage amendment, asked the U.S. Supreme Court to uphold the freedom of California voters to define marriage as one man and one woman in their state constitution.

    This request comes at the same time that voters prepare to vote on marriage through ballot measures in four other states—Maryland, Maine, Minnesota, and Washington.

    California voters passed Prop 8 in 2008 by a 52–48 percent margin, but same-sex marriage activists, unhappy with the result of the vote, asked a federal district court judge to strike down Prop 8 as a violation of the U.S. Constitution.

    The federal district court judge complied, ruling that Prop 8 violates the U.S. Constitution and finding, among other things, that “the evidence shows beyond any doubt that parents’ genders are irrelevant to children’s developmental outcomes.”

    The case then went to a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, which also ruled against Prop 8 by a vote of 2–1.

    Until the Ninth Circuit’s panel decision, Prop 8 supporters assert, “every state and federal appellate court to consider a federal constitutional challenge to state laws defining marriage—including [the U.S. Supreme Court in the 1972 case of Baker v. Nelson]—had upheld the traditional definition [of marriage].”

    Further, voters in 32 states—most recently in North Carolina in May—have voted to protect marriage as the union of husband and wife.

    Yet some same-sex marriage activists continue to argue that there is no rational reason to defend marriage as one man and one woman.

    Protecting marriage as one man and one woman is not irrational. It is one of the most rational things a society can do.

    Marriage is society’s best means of ensuring that children will be born into intact families and raised by the mother and father who created them. Individuals marry based on various private interests. The public interest in marriage is based directly on the role that marriage plays in creating and raising the next generation.

    Because of this essential connection between children and marriage, marriage is rightly described as “the cornerstone of the family” and family as the “basic building block of society.”

    Society has good reasons to protect and promote marriage in the law.

    Same-sex marriage denies the truth about marriage by breaking the essential connection between children and the mother and father who created them. Marital norms such as exclusiveness and permanence are related to the connection between marriage and children. Breaking that connection in the law will further weaken social commitments to these norms for marriage generally.

    Same-sex marriage also puts the law on the wrong side of reality by claiming that marriage is something other than what marriage is: the union of husband and wife. Many kinds of relationships are meaningful and valuable to the individuals involved and even to the broader public. But that does not make them marriages. It is not irrational or bigoted for the law to recognize that marriage is a unique kind of relationship deserving a unique kind of status.

    The marriage debate presents society with fundamentally different competing visions of what marriage is. This particular debate is best resolved through the give and take of political processes. In the Prop 8 case, the Supreme Court now has the opportunity to return the question of marriage to the people of California.

    Posted in Culture [slideshow_deploy]

    5 Responses to With Marriage on Ballot in Four States This Fall, Prop 8 Supporters Seek Supreme Court Review

    1. Adam says:

      So maybe same sex couples shouldn't have to pay taxes then, since they don't receive 1138 federal benefits and privileges that married heterosexual couples get. This would be fair right?

      • Bobbie says:

        How would that be fair? That's like saying we should be immune from all laws because some foreign nationals are…

    2. I have been browsing on-line greater than three hours today, but I never found any fascinating article like yours. It’s pretty value sufficient for me. In my view, if all web owners and bloggers made good content material as you probably did, the web will be much more useful than ever before.

    3. C. Groff says:

      Excellent commentary. In the United States, the Constitution provides protection against government restricting our God-given rights which includes the right as a people to protect the family. A same-sex relationship is a choice one makes and is allowed in this country but that choice does not give one the right to force a new definition of marriage on the majority. It is time in the country to protect what is right and good about our country and let those who choose to practice a perverted life style keep it private and in their own home and not force it on the majority who believe in the sanctity of marriage. The protection of the family unit is what makes our Country great.

    4. farmguy39 says:

      this thing about marriage and children just doesn;t ring true since some states only allow first cousins to marry if they can not have children
      so its not only about the children

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×