Federal ban on gay ‘marriage’ removed by High Court; focus moves to states

Federal ban on gay ‘marriage’ removed by High Court; focus moves to states

Sometimes a court opinion is more than just a court opinion. Justice Anthony Kennedy’s 26-page decision June 26 striking down a federal ban on same-sex “marriages” offers a window into Americans’ rapidly shifting views of same-sex relationships — a shift that increasingly relies on matters of law and fairness, not moral or religious views.

At the same time, Justice Antonin Scalia’s biting 26-page dissent in United States v. Windsor reflects a set of cultural, religious and social arguments losing ground in America.

For now, Section 2 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) — which wasn’t part of this case — allows states not to recognize gay “marriages” performed in other states, said Alabama Attorney General Luther Strange. 

Gay “marriage” is legal in 12 states and the District of Columbia. California is set to become the next state to legalize it with the Supreme Court’s decision (also June 26) not to review the lower court ruling, which overturned the state’s ban on gay “marriage.”

“The ruling by the Supreme Court does not have any effect on existing state definitions of marriage,” Strange said. “The definition of marriage — as between one man and one woman — was overwhelmingly adopted by Alabama’s voters and remains in effect.”

And while same-sex “marriage” proponents celebrated their victory of the section of DOMA that was struck down by the court, they made it clear they were after more — the full recognition of gay “marriage” across the land.

“Federal recognition for lesbian and gay couples is a massive turning point for equality, but it is not complete until every family is guaranteed complete access to the protections they need regardless of state borders,” said Chad Griffin, president of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the country’s largest organization promoting civil rights for homosexuals, bisexuals and transgender people.

Jon Davidson, legal director for Lambda Legal, said, “We will not rest until same-sex couples are treated equally not only by the federal government but in every state and community across the nation.”

HRC’s Griffin urged the Obama administration to implement the DOMA ruling broadly. 

In a statement June 26, Obama said he already had directed Attorney General Eric Holder “to work with other members of my Cabinet to review all relevant federal statutes to ensure this decision, including its implications for federal benefits and obligations, is implemented swiftly and smoothly.”

On June 27, Obama appeared to move toward calling for nationwide recognition of gay “marriage,” even in the states that have not legalized it.

“My personal belief, but I’m speaking as a president as opposed to a lawyer, is that if you’ve been married in Massachusetts and you move someplace else — you’re still married, and under federal law you should be able to obtain benefits,” he said.

The relatively subdued reaction June 26 by House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor was a reminder of the balancing act GOP leaders are playing on divisive social issues such as immigration and gay “marriage.”

They need to satisfy base supporters who strongly oppose same-sex “marriage” but be mindful that language that seems intolerant harms the national GOP brand and the prospects for regaining the White House. That is a tightrope that the GOP’s 2016 presidential contender also may have to walk.

“A robust national debate over marriage will continue in the public square, and it is my hope that states will define marriage as the union between one man and one woman,” Boehner said in a written statement. The House had paid to defend DOMA in court when the Obama administration refused to do so.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, of California, and Rep. Jerrold Nadler, of New York — senior Democrats on the House and Senate Judiciary committees — reintroduced a measure to repeal the parts of DOMA that survived the court’s scrutiny.

Meanwhile Rep. Tim Huelskamp, a Kansas Republican, said he would push Congress to adopt a constitutional amendment defining marriage as between a man and a woman.

In the 17 years since Congress passed DOMA, many Americans have gained “a new perspective, a new insight” on the meaning of marriage, Kennedy said in his opinion for the 5–4 majority. He described DOMA’s impact on gay families with terms such as: Disparage. Degrade. Demean. 

Observers noted how things have changed in a decade. 

In 2003 at the time of Lawrence v. Texas, the court’s last major gay rights case, support for gay “marriage” was 32 percent; today, that figure is 51 percent.

In 2003 gay “marriage” didn’t exist and the Episcopal Church was shell-shocked by the election of an openly gay bishop. In 2013 the election of the first openly gay Lutheran bishop in May was met with mostly shrugs, and on June 26 the bells of Washington National Cathedral pealed in celebration.

A recent Gallup Poll found a 19-point swing on the “moral acceptability” of gay and lesbian relations since 2001 — the largest shift on any social issue. As Gallup put it, “U.S. acceptance of gay/lesbian relations is the new normal.”

These developments have fueled a reassessment of marriage that undergirds Kennedy’s opinion: “DOMA instructs … all persons with whom same-sex couples interact … that their marriage is less worthy than the marriages of others.”

Scalia’s arguments, too, are illuminating but more for the fact that they once were considered mainstream and are now losing ground. DOMA supporters did not act “with hateful hearts,” he said, and Americans who oppose same-sex “marriage” are neither “mean-
spirited” nor “unhinged members of a wild-eyed lynch mob.”

Scalia appealed to tradition, saying he and other conservatives are looking to enshrine an understanding of marriage that was “unquestioned in our society for most of its existence — indeed had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history.”

Scalia warned that “as far as this Court is concerned, no one should be fooled; it is just a matter of … waiting for the other shoe” to drop and force states to accept gay “marriage” from other states or Washington.

(BP, RNS, TAB)

__________________________________________________

Decision has implications for witness

Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, said the Supreme Court’s June 26 decision has “profound implications for our gospel witness.”

Gay and lesbian people in the community are not enemies but are “like all of us, seeking a way that seems right to them,” Moore said. 

If marriage is as strong and resilient as Christ proclaims it to be in Mark 10:6–9, the court can’t wipe it out, he said.

“Some (gay and lesbian people) will be disappointed by what they thought would answer their quest for meaning. Will our churches be ready to answer?” Moore asked. “Those with same-sex attractions who follow Christ will be walking away from what their families and friends want for them. Following Jesus will mean taking up a cross and following a hard narrow way. It always does.”

To preach that kind of gospel, Christians must be clear that self-denial is not just for “homosexually tempted” Christians but for all believers, Moore said.

To read the full text of Moore’s message, visit www.russellmoore.com.

(RNS, BP)