Over at the invaluable Public Discourse site , Helen Alvare offers the first installment of a two-part series on the Supreme Court and family law. Here’s the takeaway from Part I:
In sum, our Supreme Court has time and time again, and in an axiomatic fashion, expressed the state’s interests in marriage as: children, their formation, and the building up of a society of citizens well-prepared for self-government. In the process of recognizing various rights claimed by parents respecting their children, the Court has further observed that to the extent parents have such rights, it is because they have duties toward children. Those who demand that the state recognize, as marriage, partnerships of two persons of the same sex, ignore or deny the long line of Supreme Court decisions affirming the links between the state’s interests in marriage and child-welfare and social health.
I’m looking forward to Part II.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
How the State Failed Noelia Castillo
On March 26, Noelia Castillo, a twenty-five-year-old Spanish woman, was killed by her doctors at her own…
The Mind’s Profane and Sacred Loves
The teachers you have make all the difference in your life. That they happened to come into…
History’s Pro Tips on Iran
Nothing in human experience compares to the wars of the last 120 years. Their scope has grown…
