Proposition 8 Trial: Morals and Civilization of a People.

On the blogsite, The Foundry, Chuck Donovan wrote about the Proposition 8 Trial:

"Same-Sex Marriage and a Level-Playing Field for Religious Argument."

One of the most significant issues [emerging from pre-trial briefs and witness testimony] concerns the argument made by opponents of Prop 8 that proof of moral or religious support for Prop 8 would make the measure constitutionally suspect or invalid.

[...]

[It] can safely be asserted that, no matter what side of the issue one takes, the question of how to define marriage involves an unavoidable moral aspect. Certain law professors who support same-sex marriage have openly admitted this point. [...] The Human Rights Campaign, for example, has a “Religion and Faith Program” and reported last summer that Harry Knox, the director of that program, had visited California “to flesh out a plan with California Faith for Equality to mobilize clergy and people of faith for marriage equality.”

[...]

It would be hypocritical for advocates of same-sex marriage to marshal religion in support of judicial and political measures designed to institute same-sex marriage while at the same time arguing that religious or moral support for marriage as the union of husband and wife is somehow improper, unprincipled, or illegal.

* * *

[Click here to read the rest of this blogpost.]

Donovan cited the US Supreme Court and quoted a bit from the Maynard opinion. Here is a more extensive quotation:

Marriage is more than a personal relation between a man and woman. It is a status founded on contract and established by law. It constitutes an institution involving the highest interests of society. It is regulated and controlled by law based upon principles of public policy affecting the welfare of the people of the state. Marriage, as creating the most important relation in life, as having more to do with the morals and civilization of a people than any other institution, has always been subject to the control of the legislature. That body prescribes the age at which parties may contract to marry, the procedure or form essential to constitute marriage, the duties and obligations it creates, its effects upon the property rights of both, present and prospective, and the acts which may constitute grounds for its dissolution.

There are, in effect, three parties to every marriage, the man, the woman and the state.... Marriage is not a contract within the meaning of the provision of the Federal Constitution which prohibits the impairment by the States of the obligation of contracts.The Domestic Relations Law provides in great detail when and how marriage may be entered into, how the relation may be dissolved, the grounds for divorce and annulment, the rights and liabilities of husband and wife, the age at which the relation may be entered into and the class of persons who are disqualified from marrying.

[Emphasis highlights the part that Donovan emphasized.]