The Home of American Intellectual Conservatism — First Principles

October 30, 2014

FEATURE ARTICLES
Page 1 of 3
As California Goes, So Goes the Nation
Bradley C. S. Watson - 07/28/08

On May 15, 2008, a narrowly divided Supreme Court of California struck down the state’s ban on same-sex “marriage.” The decision was based on what the Court considered to be an evolution in community values. It flew in the face of the California Constitution’s text, tradition, logic, and structure. As one of the dissenters noted, there is now nothing to stop a future court from declaring bans on polygamous or incestuous marriage to be constitutionally unjustified.

Nonetheless, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger quickly announced that he would not support a challenge to the Court decision. This despite the fact he had vetoed same-sex “marriage” legislation less than three years earlier. At that time, he argued such legislation would conflict with a state proposition against same-sex “marriage” that had been passed by more than 60 percent of California voters in 2000.

The political and cultural dynamics in California mirror the dynamics of the same-sex “marriage” fight across North America. They portend the end of marriage as it has always been known in the United States. Canada and Massachusetts have already succumbed to judicially mandated same-sex “marriage,” and so will America as a whole unless decisive political action is taken immediately.

The political and cultural dynamics of which I speak look like this:

  1. A clear majority of the citizens or legislators within a jurisdiction express their opposition to same-sex “marriage.”
  2. A court within that jurisdiction declares same-sex “marriage” to be a right, relying on some variation of an equal-protection argument, and sometimes falsely analogizing prohibitions on same-sex “marriage” to prohibitions on interracial marriage.
  3. Politicians immediately cave in, reversing their own very recent opposition to same-sex “marriage.”
  4. Procedures and legislation within that jurisdiction are changed to accord with the court’s decision.
  5. Same-sex “marriage” advocates, having succeeded in altering “the facts on the ground” as new “marriages” result from judicial decree, wait for their next opportunity to strike.
  6. The arguments for the further spread of same-sex “marriage” become relatively more powerful as taboos are shattered, the unthinkable becomes routine, and couples within this wholly new type of relationship—one that has never been recognized anywhere in human history—demand that their status be recognized across jurisdictions.
Page 1 of 3
Intercollegiate Studies Institute • 3901 Centerville Rd. • Wilmington, Delaware 19807-1938 • www.isi.org
Please direct all inquiries regarding First Principles to firstprinciples@isi.org.