Regarding same-sex marriage.

        When states forbid same-sex couples from marrying, are they
motivated by animus, morality, or some other concern?  No doubt the courts
will wrestle with this problem more and more in the near future, especially
as we see municipal governments, states (California to some extent), and
many Fortune 500 companies (you recall the bruhaha when Disney did it)
providing benefits to domestic partners of employees.  Many companies now
feel they are at a competitive disadvantage in getting and keeping good
employees if they do not offer domestic benefits.

        In the past certainly courts were satisfied that same-sex unions
fell outside the definition of marriage.  But insistence that marriage is
between a man and a woman fails to answer important questions.  What purpose
does marriage serve and what interest does the state have in regulating it?
When Congress passed DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act), it said "Were it not
for the possibility of begetting children inherent in heterosexual unions,
society would have no particular interest in encouraging citizens to come
together in a committed relationship" (Report for P.L. 104-199, 110 Stat.
2918, House Report No. 104-644).  But marriage is not limited to couples
intending to or able to bear children, and not all parents are necessarily
married.  The world observed its human population reach six billion this
week; one may argue that a social purpose is served by the state promoting
supportive unions *not* having children.

        Moreover, following up on Bill McDevitt's post regarding divorce, if
marriage is such a sacred and important social institution, it seems
anomalous that the states allow divorce.

        More broadly historically, we have seen wave after wave of
"liberation" in the 20th Century.  Great progress in liberation from
inequitable constraints for blacks, for women, for the aged, for the
handicapped is significantly within the memory of many of us.  And as I say
the wave of liberation for homosexuals--gays and lesbians--is already a
major swell.  If you want to get some sense of it, put this into your
favorite Web search engine: "Domestic benefits for same-sex couples" and hit
it.  Lottsa stuff.

Daniel M. Warner
Department of Accounting (Business Law)
Western Washington University
Bellingham, WA 98225