Quote:
|
PS, earlier in the thread someone mentioned that this is going to end up decided by the Supreme Court. I say not very likely. This is a public policy debate and is highly polarizing--exactly the kind of mess the Court likes to stay far, far away from. They are going to duck the issue for as long as they possibly can, letting the political process take its course.
|
I think there might still be a very good possibility a future court would rule. If you look at the Court based on it's current composition and leadership, they rather might "duck the issue". If you take into account future vacancies and the persons who might fill those voids and their possible leanings, a stronger chance for a ruling exists. Add to this the growing sentiment in favor of a sort of "laissez-faire" approach to same-sex unions and the public's growing weariness with the issue, the Court making the decision to rule or not may be less influenced by a dwindling opposition to the issue. Currently, it may not be taken up directly by the Court. But there will be lower appeals court rulings and, given past decisions, the rulings will most likely not be in the bible-thumpers favor. There is then the possibilty of the Court, in essence, not directly ruling on the case(s), instead just allowing the lower appeals court(s) ruling(s) to stand. If enough states were to allow same-sex unions, the issue would then shift to equal-protection issues across the States.