The United States Supreme Court this week heard arguments on two critical cases that will either be a devastating setback or a landmark victory for gay marriage: a challenge to California's Proposition 8 which overturned a lower court's ruling allowing same-sex marriage; and a case involving provisions of the federal Defense of Marriage Act. Rulings are expected no later than June but could come at any time.
It's unconscionable that in 2013, we're still arguing over whether some and not all Americans should have the same right to love and marry. And it's also unfathomable that Clarence Thomas, a black Justice, would willfully condone such discrimination when similar Draconian laws, if still in existence today, would deny him the right to marry his white wife. He more than any jurist on that court should be an unflinching advocate of the freedom to marry whoever one chooses.
The main argument against gay marriage--that it undermines the great institution of heterosexual marriage--is not just weak but laughable. Consider the fact that 50% of all such marriages end in divorce. If conservatives really want to protect the sanctity of marriage perhaps the prohibitive measure that should be enacted is not a ban on gay marriage but a ban on heterosexual divorce.
Further, how about challenging the hypocrisy of anti-gay-marriage Republican legislators and right-wing justices by having them sign personal guarantees that they themselves will never divorce. Because we all know from our Grover Norquist 101 class that Republicans love to sign sweeping pledges.
Follow Andy Ostroy on Twitter: www.twitter.com/AndyOstroy