Three cheers for the Appellate Division of NY Supreme Court...

Error message

(Note from Tim Bayly: I made several errors in this post, both of which are pointed out in a comment made by Rev. Dan Reuter below. Please read his comment.)

Last week, New York's Supreme Court upheld state laws defining marriage as between a man and a woman. Below is an excerpt of their decision. Note, again, that in our feminist (and increasingly queer) culture, biology obstinately continues to be destiny, and arguments about leadership, marriage, procreation, women combatants in the military, etc. are often best won simply by appeal to the biological realities of the male and female sex.

Note the court actually speaks of "sexual intercourse," "pregnancy," "childbirth," "biology," and "procreation" saying it's appropriate for civil law to be grounded in these realities.

Christians would do well to follow the court's lead as we serve as Christ's salt and light in an increasingly blinded and unutterably dark culture. And one of the first places such biblical doctrines need to be restored is the Church where, for too long, the unitive and procreative functions of marriage have been separated--as if your wife can be your best friend while making a lifestyle choice not to be the mother of your children--or vice versa, with the husband.

The [section of the New York Law that defines marriage as between a man and a woman] provisions regarding marriage do not violate the due process and equal protection provisions of the New York State Constitution (NY Const art I, sec. 6, sec. 11). Marriage, defined as the union between one man and one woman, is based upon important public policy considerations and has been recognized as a fundamental constitutional right (Zablocki v Redhail, 434 US 374, 383 [1978]; Skinner v Oklahoma ex rel. Williamson, 316 US 535, 541 [1942]; see also Washington v Glucksberg, 521 US 702, 720 [1997]; Griswold v Connecticut, 381 US 479, 486 [1965]). These considerations are based on innate, complementary, procreative [*7]roles, a function of biology, not mere legal rights. "[T]he reasons justifying the civil marriage laws are inextricably linked to the fact that human sexual intercourse between a man and a woman frequently results in pregnancy and childbirth" (Goodridge, 440 Mass at 357 n 1, 798 NE2d at 979 n 1 [Sosman, J., dissenting]).

(Thanks, David Talcott.)