On the marriage front, the actions of the judiciary this past week were a mixed bag.  In San Francisco, U.S. Dist. Judge Vaughn Walker refused to dismiss a challenge by marriage rights proponents to California’s Prop 8, which limits marriage in the state to a union between a man and a woman. 

This came as welcome news to California’s marriage law proponents whose state law challenges to Prop. 8 proved unsuccessful before the California Supreme Court.

Ironically, on the very page where this story was reported online, a link appeared, stating that an interracial couple was denied a marriage license in LA.  Both articles are worth reading, but the article about the LA case contains quotes by the judge who denied the marriage license.

These quotes are shocking in their narrow-mindedness and reek of the same bigotry that the U.S. Supreme Court supposedly put to rest when it outlawed bans against interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia.


I am dismayed by the ability of the marriage issue to polarize.  As we attempt to blaze forward into our cyber-futures, we remain anchored by the racism, bigotry, and selected privileges that mark our past.  The gay marriage issue is a particularly high voltage lightning rod for some, but stop the presses…we apparently have an even older and deeper wound - the ban against inter-racial marriage - that still needs cleansing. 

Please take the time to read these stories and share your thoughts.  Are we going backwards on marriage rights?  It seems to me that the problem with the entire issue is that the state got involved in an area where it had no business being involved…do you agree?  What if a law were proposed that eliminated the benefits that come with being married (e.g., tax benefits, inheritance rights, etc.)?  Would you support this approach to dealing with the issue?