4 Comments

1. 

   Ted Hess-Mahan on June 26, 2013 at 5:59 pm

   Needless to say, I am over the moon thrilled about the decisions to strike down DOMA and the Prop 8 Ban on Equal Marriage in California. Poignantly, Justice Kennedy, who ordinarily sides with conservatives on the SCOTUS, showed what appeared to be sincere, heartfelt empathy for the families of same sex couples:

   DOMA’s principal effect is to identify a subset of state sanctioned marriages and make them unequal. The principal purpose is to impose inequality, not for other reasons like governmental efficiency. Responsibilities, as well as rights, enhance the dignity and integrity of the person. And DOMA contrives to deprive some couples married under the laws of their State, but not other couples, of both rights and responsibilities. By creating two contradictory marriage regimes within the same State, DOMA forces same-sex couples to live as married for the purpose of state law but unmarried for the purpose of federal
   law, thus diminishing the stability and predictability of basic personal relations the State has found it proper to acknowledge and protect. By this dynamic DOMA undermines both the public and private significance of state sanctioned same-sex marriages; for it tells those couples, …. and all the world, that their otherwise valid marriages are unworthy of federal recognition. This places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage. The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects, …, and whose relationship the State has sought to dignify. And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples. The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.

   So if Barry Cohen and I should ever decide to marry, we now know that we will enjoy equality under federal as well as Massachusetts law.

2. 

   Gail Spector on June 26, 2013 at 6:58 pm

   Ted –
   🙂

3. 

   Mike Striar on June 27, 2013 at 2:13 pm

   Anyone who has ever read my comments on same sex marriage knows that I’m happy about this ruling. Honestly though, I never give too much credence to a Supreme Court decision. The fact that most rulings are split says a lot about the interpretive nature of the Constitution, and I don’t see that as a particularly good thing when it comes to preserving the rights of the citizenry. As far as lasting impact, it’s also worth remembering that the US Supreme Court once upheld slavery.

   The DOMA ruling aside, I think it’s worth reflecting on how the issue of same sex marriage was handled locally, because it speaks to failed leadership and missed opportunity. Former mayor, David Cohen, had the chance to draw international attention to the City of Newton, and to personally become a hero in the fight for same sex marriage. From Day 1 of his first term in office, he could have done the exact same thing that Mayor Gavin Newsom did in San Francisco, by instructing the City Clerk to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples. Whether it was a failure to recognize that opportunity or a lack of courage to take such action, we will likely never know. What we do know, is that Mayor Cohen could have done it, and should have done it. Had he done it, the City of Newton would be favorably remembered in history books, and David Cohen’s career trajectory would have taken a much different path. There’s an important lesson in there for our future leaders.

4. 

   Barry Cohen on June 27, 2013 at 4:41 pm

   Ted, really.

   I think that what the quote from Kennedy proves is that we are a country that even at the Supreme Court level is a country with no basic principles and all fundamental legal decisions are made on a feel-good what’s-the-current-problem-we-want-to-solve basis. There’s nothing in Kennedy’s statement that really talks about our fundamental outlook as a society, or what is our fundamental legal basis for making decisions.

   I think this opens up the door to marriage of any kind, which I’m sure Ted and Mike also like. So, now, since polygamy is even a TV reality show, we can expect that it’s the next hurdle. Once that is crossed, we can expect that the definition of polygamy will be expanded to any bisexual group of people, like why should a man who happens to love both a man and a woman be refused the right to be in a three-way committed relationship. And so on. You see, once you drop the idea that there’s something special about one man and one woman in a normal traditional family, you can do anything.

   I think one of the reasons that homosexual marriage is so widely accepted is that nobody really takes marriage so seriously any more. Think of how many end up in divorces and how many people we all know who have been in more than two marriages, and how many people just live together. So, we straight people really aren’t giving up anything we really hold dear, are we?

   This is not just a single event. It’s part of a change in culture that, when it gets too crazy even for the Mike Striars and Ted H-M’s of the world will reverse itself. I don’t know how long it will take, but I hope I’m around to see it.