One man + one woman = Constitutional

Well now, doesn't this just beat all. Two courts today ruled that legislation that defines marriage as one man and one woman is Constitutional.

"The highest courts in two states dealt gay rights advocates dual setbacks Thursday, rejecting same-sex couples' bid to win marriage rights in New York and reinstating a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage in Georgia. "

The most radical turn was this, out of the New York Court of Appeals:

"In a 4-2 decision, the Court of Appeals found that the state's definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman, enacted more than a century ago, could have a rational basis, and that it was up to the State Legislature, not the courts, to decide whether it should be changed. "

It's up to the Legislature not the courts to decide???? What a radical thought!

The entire New York decision was a refreshing, well spoken, common sense response to the debate. Unlike the exchange that I heard on Michael Medved's program today. A caller to the program was chastising Republicans - stating that Republicans were "afraid" to allow the important issues of the day go to popular referendum. Mr. Medved's response was a simple statement "you mean like the gay marriage?" - his reference clearing being the fact that Democrats in many states (like Minnesota) have been blocking popular referendums on Defense of Marriage amendments for quite a while now.

This debate is far from settled. Each state will, as is their Constitutional right, have to address the issue. Once that is done, gay rights advocates will try to find a sympathetic judge to over-throw the will of the people. This will end up in the Supreme Court. Which is why confirming the judges - on the Appelate and Supreme Court level - is so very important.