Just so you know what the other side is thinking, read this one from an opponent of Judge Walker’s decision. It sounds like something straight out of the 1700 or 1800s:
Marriage is a necessary defense of a woman’s sexuality and her human liberty from determined assault by men who would turn her into a slave, a concubine – something less than fully human. Human communities need to give women some additional degree of protection – through law, custom, religious decree, or sacrament – generally some combination of all three, neatly summarized by the plaintiffs, who demanded the sacred and the eternal from the state of California.
Of course, marriage’s power to protect women is far from perfect, but no human institution is. Parents, too, sometimes do awful things to their children.
Hmmm. I don’t know many women who would agree with this. But, I’m sure it resonates in the right-wing.
H/T to Gilberto for sending the link.
