Opining in The New Republic, Jeffrey Rosen joins those same-sex marriage supporters who argue for legislative over judicial action: He writes:
The experience in Europe suggests that, when victories for gay equality come from legislatures rather than courts, they can eventually grow into something more: The legislature in the Netherlands initially recognized civil unions and, several years later, granted gays and lesbians the full benefits of marriage. Unless they are forced by courts to recognize gay marriage before the public is ready, state legislatures may move through the same progression, recognizing first civil unions and eventually gay marriage. For the moment, the best thing for judges to do is the thing they're most likely to do, which is very little.
As I
said earlier, there's a valid point here, and in many
jurisdictions we're too quick to seek judicial solutions rather
than striving to win popular support. On the other hand, would
African-Americans still be waiting for government-decreed
segregation to end in the South if the courts hadn't interceded to
ensure legal equality for a minority against majority animus?
(Oops, just ticked off all those black, anti-gay "civil rights
leaders" again.)