Related articles and links |  1 of 2

California's Supreme Court on August 12 voided the marriages of nearly 4,000 homosexual couples who wed in San Francisco last spring. The justices said that Mayor Gavin Newsom did not have the authority to flout state marriage laws.

Ruling unanimously, the court said local officials may not ignore laws they disagree with. Justices sidestepped the larger question on the constitutionality of civil marriage rights for gay couples.

State law and a voter-approved ballot initiative both define marriage in California as between a man and a woman.

Newsom's challenge, along with a court ruling in Massachusetts that allowed gay marriages starting in May, prompted President Bush to publicly support a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage.

In a separate 5-2 vote, the court declared that the 4,000 marriage licenses issued between February 12, when Newsom issued the first certificate, and March 11, when the court ordered a halt, are "void and of no legal effect."

"Instead of helping his cause, Mayor Newsom has set back the same-sex marriage agenda and laid the foundation for the promarriage movement to once and for all win this battle to preserve traditional marriage," said Mathew Staver of Liberty Counsel.

Other legislative efforts to restrict gay marriage are having mixed results in the courts. On August 3, a Washington King County Superior Court judge declared the state Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to be unconstitutional, but stayed his decision so the issue could be decided by the state's Supreme Court. Three weeks later, a federal judge in Washington state ruled the federal DOMA to be constitutional. The ruling says there is no fundamental right to same-sex marriage.

Copyright © 2004 Christianity Today. Click for reprint information.

Weblog also commented on the ruling.

Christianity Today's past coverage of the gay marriage debate includes:

Thirteen Bad Arguments for Same-Sex Marriage | Why the rhetoric doesn't stand up under scrutiny. (Aug. 26, 2004)

The Man Behind the Marriage Amendment | It's just as well that Matt Daniels loves a good fight, because he has a big one on his hands. (Aug. 25, 2004)

A Crumbling Institution | How social revolutions cracked the pillars of marriage. (Aug. 24, 2004)

What God Hath Not Joined | Why marriage was designed for male and female. (Aug. 20, 2004)

The Next Sexual Revolution | By practicing what it preaches on marriage, the church could transform society. (Aug. 27, 2003)

My Two Dads? Not in Florida | U.S. Circuit Court upholds ban on gay adoption (March 11, 2004)

Speaking Out: Why Gay Marriage Would Be Harmful | Institutionalizing homosexual marriage would be bad for marriage, bad for children, and bad for society. (Feb. 19, 2004)

Let No Law Put Asunder | A constitutional amendment defending marriage is worth the effort. (Jan. 26, 2004)

Massachusetts Court Backs Gay Marriage | Christians say gay activists will overturn marriage laws (Dec. 10, 2003)

'A Man and a Woman' | Activists say the Federal Marriage Amendment will be the defining issue in the next election. (Nov. 24, 2003)

The Marriage Battle Begins | Profamily and gay activists agree: Texas decision sets significant precedent. (Aug. 11, 2003)

Canada Backs Gay Marriages | Conservatives say decision could put pressure on dissenting churches. (July 16, 2003)

Marriage in the Dock | Massachusetts case on gay marriage could set off chain reaction. (April 25, 2003)

Christian Conservatives Split on Federal Marriage Amendment | Law would protect marriage from courts, but legislatures could still extend marital benefits to same-sex unions. (July 20, 2002)

next page... |  1 of 2

August (Web-only) 2004, Vol. 48