Why I am opposed to the Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage
After the Supreme Court's historic decision, my facebook wall exploded with commentary lauding the decision. This is the first time I can recall in which every post in a given day was on the same topic. Amongst us well-educated urban professionals, gay marriage has become a litmus test for whether you're "hip," "tolerant," and "progressive." To oppose gay marriage is now tantamount to confessing you're a child molester or a racist. You just can't do it.
This is the reason why I did not post my true feelings on the decision on my wall. I know all too well that I will be accused of bigotry, and they won't even consider the merits of my argument. I feel safe on WSO however, where anonymity reigns.
Let me be very clear on this. I PERSONALLY have no problem with gay marriage, nor do I wish gays ill. This issue has virtually no impact on my life, and I spend little time thinking or even caring about it. My opposition to the decision is a purely legal one and can be boiled down to the following assertion: marriage is not a political or legal right that is explicitly or implicitly guaranteed by the Constitution. As such, marriage is not a constitutional issue and hence not within the purview of the Supreme Court. The Court's job is to interpret the law, pure and simple. It is not supposed to rewrite the law or legislate from the bench. Its purpose is to act as an impartial arbiter of what the Constitution says and apply that reading to current problems.
When one reads the majority decision, there is very little in the way of actual legal arguments. Rather, it reads like a sophomoric romantic poetry aimed to tug at the heartstrings of its readers. It makes an emotional plea aimed at love. After all, only a monster can be opposed to love, right? However, this case is not about love. Us conservatives never said that consenting gay adults cannot be in a romantic relationship and engage in sexual activities. We do not deny them the right to enter into a civil relationship with its correspondent rights. We simply believe that big questions over marriage-a social institution that has evolved over thousands of years-should be decided by the people through a legislative process, not by judicial fiat. Yet, that is precisely what the Supreme Court has done. The majority, swept up by the false premise that equates gay marriage to civil rights for blacks, invoked raw emotions to impose its definition of marriage on the entire country. Gay activists meanwhile have bludgeoned anyone opposed as a bigot, a cultural neanderthal who is stuck in the 19th century. Religious people have now been marginalized by the radical cultural left, which seeks to aggressively use the courts to fundamentally re-shape American society.
For conservatives, this week saw three bad Supreme Court decisions (Obamacare and Texas housing being the others). It's a wake-up call for us, a stark reminder of just how high the stakes are in the 2016 presidential election. With several Court seats being up for grabs soon, a Republican president can once again put the Court on the right track: a venerable institution that sets aside its personal biases and adjudicates on the law.
FYI, I fully expect to get a ton of monkey shit for this post, but hopefully it will at least garner some interesting discussion.