Thursday, May 20, 2004
Dhalia Lithwick nails why the "slippery slope" argument against gay marrage doesn't cut it: "One of the most persistent complaints of conservative commentators is that liberal activist judges refuse to decide the case before them and instead use the law to reshape the entire legal landscape for years to come. The Massachusetts Supreme Court, in finding that the ban on gay marriage violated the state constitution, did exactly what good judges ought to do: It confined its reasoning to the case before it, rather than addressing the myriad hypothetical future cases that may be affected by the decision. Opponents of gay marriage should consider doing the same."
// posted by Bill @ 12:59 PM 
Post a Comment