esrosedotblog

This article from today's NYTimes is a basic schooling in the gay rights/gay marriage debates.

Lawyers Seek Sea Change on Gay Rights at Supreme Court

It is important because the Supreme Court is going to hear the cases in four states that have passed anti-gay marriage legislation.

There are many paths which their decision might take but when examined under a cold light, as in this article, it is pretty clear that there are only several possible ways for them to approach the issue.

I do not want to go into the article's points. It is a lot better that you read it and make your own conclusions. You might be more or less optimistic than I am as a result of reading it.

My own take?

I am optimistic that they will clear away a lot of the brush on this.

The main argument against gay marriage has to do with some arcane understanding of the religious rights of people who hate gay marriage. Upside down.

It is true that my marriage to my husband John is an affront to some people. Somewhere. I never see them. They, in fact, never see me in any way that is openminded and inquisitive.

It is as though the lines have been drawn and people stand on either side with no interest in further discussion.

Guilty as charged.

I am not interested in dialog.

This is why we have a Supreme Court.

I just hope they do their job. That means to be clear and concise and definitive. Not squishy and divisive.

The issue will not go away. If not this year, next.

"The gays" are going to continue to couple to the dismay of some busybodies who cannot comprehend that the "sanctity of marriage" extends to all. Or is not sacred at all.

Underneath this all, not very deep, is the old abiding tension between church and state.

A traditional struggle.

Dueling moralities.

Labels: christist watch, gay marriage, gay rights