The Right Coast
December 25, 2003
Tushnet on Same Sex Marriage
By Michael Rappaport
Eve Tushnet has an interesting piece arguing against same sex marriage and the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision holding that the state constitution requires that same sex marriage be recognized in the state. The logic of her argument against same sex marriage -- that marriage is about protecting children -- seems to suggest that it is problematic for gay couples to adopt or have children. This is a premise that is often omitted from social conservative arguments against same sex marriage, but would appear to be an important part of that argument.
Concerning the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision, Tushnet has this to say:
The funny thing is, this bait-and-switch approach to judging may be turned against the Goodridge decision itself in the future. As UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh (who supports same-sex marriage) has pointed out, the language the majority used in its decision gives no good reason to bar polygamy or adult incestuous marriages. If marriage is simply about commitment, well, obviously we can make commitments to more than one person. And we can make commitments to people who are already members of our families - for example, siblings. Why should these commitments not be recognized in law as marriages?