The Massachusetts example

Washington Times ^ | 11/19/03

[kattracks]

The decision yesterday by the Massachusetts Supreme Court, by the margin of 4 to 3, that homosexuals have the right to "marry" under that state's constitution could force all states to decide whether to recognize gay "marriage." The quotation marks around "marriage" are important. To those of us who believe that marriage is properly reserved for unions of one man and one woman it has become clear that, given current judicial trends, homosexual "marriage" is likely to become the law of the land without an amendment to the U.S. Constitution. President Bush, learning of the ruling as he landed yesterday in London, promised to work with legislative leaders to protect the sanctity of marriage as we have known it for centuries. This is good news.

[Post Toasties]

If the USSC continues to interfere with the law of the land by ruling that there's a Constitutional right to homosexual marriage (which clearly is not the case), it opens the door to pressure groups who want to repeal states' age of consent laws and laws prohibiting polygamy.