Main | Tuesday, July 06, 2010

HomoQuotable - Jonathan Rauch

"Ms. Kagan seems to reject both forms of absolutism. Civil rights, she implies, are important, but so is judicial modesty, and a sensible judge balances the two. A sensible judge can say something like, 'Same-sex marriage may indeed be a civil right, but not all civil rights demand immediate judicial intervention, and other important interests militate against imposing this one on the whole country right now.'

"Viewed in that light, the argument for upholding California’s gay marriage ban has merit — not because the policy is fair or wise (it isn’t) but because it represents a reasonable judgment that the people of California are entitled to make. Barring gay marriage but providing civil unions is not the balance I would choose, but it is a defensible balance to strike, one that arguably takes 'a cautious approach to making such a significant change to the institution of marriage' (as the lawyers defending Proposition 8 write in one of their briefs) while going a long way toward meeting gay couples’ needs." - Jonathan Rauch, writing for the New York Times.

Rauch is the vice president of the homocon site Independent Gay Forum. His column for the Times has already been approvingly noted by NOM.

Labels: , , , , ,

comments powered by Disqus