Amor de Cosmos

The California Supreme Court released just now their decision upholding Proposition 8, which re-defines the word marriage as only between a man and a woman.

I just did a quick read through the decision (Click here for the readable version I have posted online, click here for the official PDF) and the salient bit is this:

Contrary to petitioners’ assertion, Proposition 8 does not entirely repeal or abrogate the aspect of a same-sex couple’s state constitutional right of privacy and due process… that is, the constitutional right of same-sex couples to “choose one’s life partner and enter with that person into a committed, officially recognized, and protected family relationship that enjoys all of the constitutionally based incidents of marriage”

Nor does Proposition 8 fundamentally alter the meaning and substance of state constitutional equal protection principles as articulated in that opinion. Instead, the measure carves out a narrow and limited exception to these state constitutional rights, reserving the official designation of the term “marriage” for the union of opposite-sex couples as a matter of state constitutional law, but leaving undisturbed all of the other extremely significant substantive aspects of a same-sex couple’s state constitutional right to establish an officially recognized and protected family relationship and the guarantee of equal protection of the laws.

So, dignity aside – and that’s a big aside – the decision only changes the word ‘marriage.’ It does not affect the rights of gays and lesbians in California, who retain all the rights of marriage – except the name.

This reminds me of the story of how Indiana once tried to refine pi as pi=3.2 as a failed attempt at rewriting existence.