The Heritage Foundation’s Ryan Anderson wasted no time in putting out a rebuttal to the Supreme Court’s ruling on marriage equality. To him, and to everyone who disagrees with this ruling (and the Obamacare ruling, and, and, and…) this is legislating from the bench, and we have unelected officials telling us what to think. It’s an outrageous violation of the Constitution and the principles of democracy. . . and all that. So what does Anderson have to say?
He starts his column in The Daily Signal with this:
Today is a significant setback for all Americans who believe in the Constitution, the rule of law, democratic self-government, and marriage as the union of one man and one woman. The U.S. Supreme Court got it wrong: It should not have mandated all 50 states to redefine marriage.
Because marriage is between a man and a woman, and all that jazz, so the Court is forcing something unnatural on the states. Marriage, according to Anderson, is for the benefit of future children. A different article in The Daily Signal discusses all the studies that have been done showing that children do best when they have both a mother and a father who are married to each other. Therefore, marriage equality is bad.
Anderson also trotted out the tired argument that this is an issue that should be decided by the people and their elected representatives, and not a court. He said:
Five unelected judges do not have the power to change the truth about marriage or the truth about the Constitution.
No, but they do have the power to interpret things as they pertain to the Constitution, which is what they did here. They didn’t write a law and hand it to the states, saying, “Enforce it, or else!” They interpreted bans on same-sex marriage through the lens of the 14th Amendment of the Constitution, and decided that those bans violate the Equal Protection clause. That’s their job, and they did their job.
He also said that a majority of Americans voted to define marriage “correctly.” However, times have changed, and a majority of Americans now support marriage equality. However, with politicians in office who fight against marriage equality, especially those who do so on religious grounds, getting repeals of those bans has been tough.
The proper response to this horror, then, is to find ways to ensure that the government doesn’t punish people for standing up for their beliefs. The people who will stand for the “truth” that marriage is between a man and a woman only will need protection now.
Anderson, like the rest of the religious right, is fear-mongering. They don’t want to lose their privileged status of being the purveyors of Right, Good and True™ ways of thinking, which is exactly what’s happening. The Supreme Court got it right, and these guys have it wrong.