Maryland gets it right.

I haven't read the opinion yet, and probably won't because I have no one to really discuss it with, but from this and what I heard on NPR today, Maryland got it right.

This has nothing to do with weather gays SHOULD have the right to marry, it has to do with if the state constitution already gives them that right. Common sense and the state supreme court says it doesn't. No matter where you stand on this issue, I would hope you would agree that society has the right to make our own rules and laws. The constitutions of the US and the states protect a few rights from being infringed, but this protection was itself agreed to by a majority (or even a super majority) when the constitution was ratified. To come in decades later and reinterpret what basic rights the constitution protects is in my opinion a cop out, it short circuits the democratic process. I can guarantee you that the people who ratified the Maryland constitution never thought it would be used to force the acceptance of gay marriage.

Essentially I'm saying that the right to gay marriage needs to come from the legislature, not the courts. To claim that the right to gay marriage is "already in the constitution" is foolish and dangerous. If the language is that loose, then another group can find the right to just about anything "already" in the constitution. The abuse of "equal rights" or "equal protection" phrase is sickening in my option. There is nothing "unequal" about defining who one can marry. It is similar to defining who can park in disable parking places. I can't because I don't fit the definition of "disabled" but I'm not treated UNequally at all, because the definition is clear and applies to everyone equally.

Anyways, I'm rambling here so I'll just go to bed...


Maryland justices say no to marriage - Yahoo! News