Robert P. George on DOM and the Link to Abortion

Yesterday's Wall Street Journal featured an opinion piece by Robert P. George on traditional marriage. George is the professor of jurisprudence at Princeton University and founder of the American Principles Project. He writes about the dangers of redefining marriage:

If marriage is redefined, its connection to organic bodily union—and thus to procreation—will be undermined. It will increasingly be understood as an emotional union for the sake of adult satisfaction that is served by mutually agreeable sexual play. But there is no reason that primarily emotional unions like friendships should be permanent, exclusive, limited to two, or legally regulated at all. Thus, there will remain no principled basis for upholding marital norms like monogamy.

Now before anyone gets excited and argues that gay marriages would be monogamous, Professor George is talking about the basis for marriage in general. His major argument is that marriage is designed to have the potential for procreation. Not that every marriage will result in children or that every sexual act in marriage will result in children but that the institution of marriage is designed for the creation and rearing of children. He also points out:

Candid and clear-thinking advocates of redefining marriage recognize that doing so entails abandoning norms such as monogamy. In a 2006 statement entitled “Beyond Same-Sex Marriage,” over 300 lesbian, gay, and allied activists, educators, lawyers, and community organizers—including Gloria Steinem, Barbara Ehrenreich, and prominent Yale, Columbia and Georgetown professors—call for legally recognizing multiple sex partner (“polyamorous”) relationships. Their logic is unassailable once the historic definition of marriage is overthrown.

Is this a red herring? This week’s Newsweek reports more than 500,000 polyamorous households in the U.S.

Now all of these arguments are to point out the dangers of the Supreme Court ruling against California's Proposition 8 that is likely to go before the Court following a federal lawsuit that was filed.

Professor George notes the relationship between a potential decision creating a "right" to gay marriage and the "right" to abortion created in Roe v. Wade:

By short-circuiting the democratic process, Roe inflamed the culture war that has divided our nation and polarized our politics. Abortion, which the Court purported to settle in 1973, remains the most unsettled issue in American politics—and the most unsettling. Another Roe would deepen the culture war and prolong it indefinitely.

Some insist that the Supreme Court must invalidate traditional marriage laws because “rights” are at stake. But as in Roe, they are forced to peddle a strained and contentious reading of the Constitution—one whose dubiousness would undermine any ruling’s legitimacy.

Professor George, as always, writes well-reasoned, informative articles and opinion pieces. This one is no different and certainly makes the case that our generation could see another Roe ruling.

By removing decisions like abortion from the democratic process, the Court created an issue that troubles America's very core and divides us today--over 35 years later.

If Sotomayor is confirmed, would they have the votes to do it again with the definition of marriage?