Transcript: Supreme Court Hearings on Gay Marriage Cases

This is proof that reading is reading, no matter what you read.  I took a  break in my regular reading of YA novels to look at the actual arguments before the court on this hot-bed issue.  I find the arguments in these cases to be fascinating, because there is an attempt to look at the law, impartially, in highly emotionally charged topics.  I also like "smart", and these are very, very smart people.  The precedents cited are also interesting.  I studied Lawrence in my school law class, and have a "slightly" personal connection to Loving, as my family moved to Virginia in the 1960s and were shocked at the difference in race relations here, as opposed to their native California.  In any case, it's all very intriguing.  The arguments were strong, but circular, as the Supreme Court justices repeatedly pointed out in their challenges to the lawyers making these cases.  The impact of approving gay marriage is a civil rights issue that would have far-reaching consequences.  Questions remain -- is marriage a religious institution, or a government one?  Is it an institution within the domain of the federal government, or in the purview of the states?  Should civil rights like these be decided by the electorate?  (Here, I have to say no.  If we had waited for the electorate to vote on civil rights for blacks, we would still be waiting.  On a personal level, I think the government sometimes has to step in and protect certain classes rather than wait on societal opinion to catch up.)  No matter what the outcome, the justices clearly want to make "good law."  I think the reason they turned back the Prop 8 case is because it didn't have enough meat to hang a major decision on.  It is clear that when they rule on this in June, they will be careful to be solid in how they write the majority opinion, so that it withstands any future challenges.  And, I'll say it now -- my money is on 6 to 3 for the plaintiffs.