Culture
The war rages on

Two appellate courts, the Georgia Supreme Court and the NY Court of Appeals, issued decisions that “outlawed” gay marriage. The Georgia high court reversed a lower court and reinstated the state’s ban of gay marriage. The lower court held that the ballot measure that decided against gay marriage was violative of the single-subject rule for ballot measures. The measure was approved by 76% of Georgia voters in 2004. Lawyers objecting to the measure argued that the measure was confusing because voters were asked to vote on same-sex marriage and civil unions. The Georgia high court, however, unanimously held that Georgians knew what they were voting for when they overwhelmingly rejected gay marriage.

In NY, the highest court of the state, in a 4-3 decision, upheld the state legislature’s declaration that limits marriage to one man and one woman. They emphasized that the decision on marriage is a legislative, not judicial decision. They also rejected the concept that gay marriage is a “fundamental right” since same sex marriage is not “deeply rooted in the nation’s history and tradition.”

Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic Party issued this statement in response to the NY Court of Appeals decision:

As Democrats, we believe that every American has a right to equal protection under the law and to live in dignity. And we must respect the right of every family to live in dignity with equal rights, responsibilities and protections under the law. Today's decision by the New York Court of Appeals, which relies on outdated and bigoted notions about families, is deeply disappointing, but it does not end the effort to achieve this goal.

As that essential process moves forward, it is up to the State legislature to act to protect the equal rights of every New Yorker and for the debate on how to ensure those rights to proceed without the rancor and divisiveness that too often surrounds this issue.

An interesting statement by the former Presidential candidate. He labels all of us who believe marriage to be exclusively between one man and one woman as outdated bigots. Yet in the next paragraph he wants his position debated “without rancor and divisiveness”! Yikes! Maybe Howard should start with not being rancorous and divisive toward us old fashioned folks with traditional virtues?