A few weeks ago there was an article detailing the battle in Kentucky concerning their ban on same-sex marriage. The state’s ridiculous “argument” was that same-sex marriage shouldn’t be legal because gay couples can’t procreate. They also tried to claim that this would somehow negatively impact the state’s economy.
No, seriously, that was their argument.
Well, this past Tuesday, Judge John G. Heyburn ruled the ban unconstitutional and had a few choice words for the state of Kentucky:
“These arguments are not those of serious people. Though it seems almost unnecessary to explain, here are the reasons why. Even assuming the state has a legitimate interest in promoting procreation, the Court fails to see, and Defendant never explains, how the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage has any effect whatsoever on procreation among heterosexual spouses. Excluding same-sex couples from marriage does not change the number of heterosexual couples who choose to get married, the number who choose to have children, or the number of children they have.”
He also went on to say, “The state’s attempts to connect the exclusion of same-sex couples from marriage to its interest in economic stability and in ‘ensuring humanity’s continued existence’ are at best illogical and even bewildering.”
That response is nearly perfect. Though I wish he would have put something in there about procreation not being a requirement for marriage and that banning same-sex couples based on their inability to procreate would also have to include any heterosexuals who couldn’t have children.
You don’t have to be a judicial scholar to see how weak of an “argument” the state of Kentucky put up here. Because like I said, even if they were successful in winning this case, they would have then had to ban all heterosexual couples from marrying if they couldn’t have children for whatever reasons.
This fight against the legalization of same-sex marriage has just became pathetically sad. Even in strongly Republican states, judges are overturning these bans right and left because there’s absolutely no argument that can be made to deny homosexuals their right to marry without blatantly violating their Constitutional rights.
It’s like I’ve said several times before, the debate on same-sex marriage is over – we won. It’s no longer a matter of if same-sex marriage will be legal in the United States, but when.
No comments:
Post a Comment