James Joyner notes that there’s much wailing and gnashing of teeth on the left side of the blogosphere over the relatively narrow margin by which Elena Kagan was confirmed by the Senate: Read more…
Let’s play a little game. A husband and a wife have a baby via, er, natural insemination. For some reason, a court needs to determine parentage. What objective standards could the court use to make that determination?
Well, DNA tests can be used. That gives an objective answer.
There are other scientific tests that can also be used. These tests may be less reliable than DNA, but these tests are a tool that can give an answer that is accurate to a given degree.
Then there’s the presumption that any child born to the woman during the marriage belongs to her husband. This rule takes advantage of a phenomenon that is well known– that a wife’s most frequent (usually only) sex partner is her husband. This is a clear rule founded on observable reality. One can objectively determine whether the rule has been followed. Furthermore, the presumption is rebuttable to take care of those situations in which there have been some, um, indiscretions. (Some would say not nearly rebuttable enough, but that’s beside the point). So, objective facts can counteract the rule when warranted.
Okay. Let’s try a different scenario. Two women come to the same court. They have been raising a child together. Read more…
(July 21, 2010) We’ve already podcasted Dr J’s talk from this rally, “It Takes a lot of Faith to Believe in Same-Sex Marriage.” She also recorded two of the other speakers. Bishop Harry Jackson and Pastor Derek McCoy both discussed the importance of the vote in the defense of traditional marriage.
To date, 31 states have voted to define marriage as occurring between one man and one woman. Maine overturned same-sex marriage by People’s Veto, and all the states that have enacted same-sex marriage have done so through the courts (Vermont used its legislature as well).
Loading ...
