Close icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Using strict terminology, there are people for whom marriage to anyone might be permanently denied. Defining marriage in terms of sex begs the question of how we define a person's sex in the first place. When the marriage defenders move beyond their point about Baker 's force as controlling precedent, their arguments on constitutional questions go back to the same root: Why would they want to bother?
Twitter icon A stylized bird with an open mouth, tweeting.
This is why they are so determined to enact federal laws, and perhaps even constitutional amendmentsto prevent gay marriage from having the same status as heterosexual marriage, even though it is legal. That understanding had been so well established that, init would be entirely unremarkable that the Supreme Court would conclude that a gay couple's challenge to a traditional marriage law did not even raise "a substantial federal question. The point that they emphasize most heavily, about opposite-sex marriage, is the necessary link they say exists between marriage and child-bearing and child-rearing.
Children in stable, married households can be better off than those who aren't.