The Supreme Court - Oral Arguments on Homosexual Marriage - Addendum

Addendum:  One of our Readers brought up an interesting Point on our just prior Discussion regarding the Oral Arguments before the Supreme Court, the Questioning by Mme. Justice Sotomayor, Chief Justice Roberts and the Arguments of Attorney Theodore Olsen:

(This Line of Argument was not raised in the Exchanges between the Justices and Attorney Olsen but it would have been, we think, an interesting one)

OK, OK, Moslems...let's keep them out of the Discussion for the Moment but how about the Mormons?

Do States have a Right to restrict Mormons from their „Freedom of Religion” and prohibit Marriages to multiple Spouses?

Then, see Mr. Olsen's Reply to Justice Sotomayor and Justice Roberts' Questioning which begs the Question, why Mormons would be denied their „Constitutional Right” to „Freedom of Religion” by getting married to 3, 6, 12, 16 or Goodness knows to how many Spouses...

Notes:  Mormons are one of the largest, the fastest growing and the richest Religious Denomination in the United States.  Mormon Churches have $ 60 Billion in Cash Assets in the Bank.  Nowhere near enough to eliminate the Federal Deficit, but still...

All States have Legislation which outlaws Multiple Spouses.  None of these Laws has been found to be unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court - Oral Arguments on Homosexual Marriages

On Tuesday the Supreme Court of the United States heard Oral Arguments on one of the two Cases on the Issue which the Court agreed to review; today's Arguments were on the California Initiative (Proposition 8) prohibiting Homosexual Marriages which was ruled invalid by lower Federal Courts.  The Pressure on the Court in recent Weeks to issue a Finding that any Prohibition on Homosexual (i. e., Gay) Marriages is unconstitutional has been enormous. 

The Arguments and Questioning by the Justices were often amusing; there was Laughter in the Court on more than one Occasion.  We would like to focus on one such Instances which, despite being amusing, raise relevant Issues.

The Issue that caught this Column's Attention is Polygamy.

Essentially, if the Argument against a Prohibition against Homosexual Marriages is to be equated to similar Arguments against miscegenation, for Example (which were ruled unconstitutional by the Court), then, well, then, here is an Exchange between Mme. Justice Sotomayor and Attorney Theodore Olson:

Mme. Justice Sonia Sotomayor

Sotomayor: If you say that marriage is a fundamental right, what state restrictions could ever exist?

Olson: "Well, you've said -- you've said in the cases decided by this Court that the polygamy issue, multiple marriages raises questions about exploitation, abuse, patriarchy, issues with respect to taxes, inheritance, child custody, it is an entirely different thing. And if you -- if a State prohibits polygamy, it's prohibiting conduct. If it prohibits gay and lesbian citizens from getting married, it is prohibiting their exercise of a right based upon their status."

 

Attorney Theodore Olsen

which then allowed Chief Justice Roberts to raise the Issue of the Definition of Marriage, the „Label:”

Roberts: “So it's just about — it's just about the label in this case.”

Olson: “The label is — ”

Roberts: “Same-sex couples have every other right, it's just about the label.”

Olson: “The label ‘marriage’ means something. Even our opponents — ”

Roberts: “Sure. If you tell — if you tell a child that somebody has to be their friend, I suppose you can force the child to say, this is my friend, but it changes the definition of what it means to be a friend. And that's it seems to me what the — what supporters of Proposition 8 are saying here. You're — all you're interested in is the label and you insist on changing the definition of the label.”
Olson: “It is like you were to say you can vote, you can travel, but you may not be a citizen. There are certain labels in this country that are very, very critical.”

 

Chief Justice Roberts

The above Exchanges expose, rather than resolve, the Difficulties of the Issue of Homosexual Marriages.

What would be the Consequences of the Ruling by the Supreme Court, no Matter in which Direction it goes (some are suggesting that the Supreme Court is tending towards as „narrow” Ruling) to, say, Muslims in the United States, which is soon becoming a „Multi-Culty” Society, for wanting to exercise their Religious Right to Polygamy?  Would a Denial of the Right of Muslims to engage in Polygamy be a Denial of their Right to freely exercise their Religion?

The Issue is complex, difficult and will hang as a Damocles' Sword over Generations yet unborn; certainly this is going into uncharted Waters, as many Things seem to be doing these Days; the Challenges that the Supreme Court is facing in coming down with a Decision on this Case are immense and burdensome; burdensome on future Generations; Things are not as simple as Mr. Olson, who has switched Positions and Affiliations with ease in his Career, would have us believe they are.