And in some circles, unanimous response...
From the unanimous decision: (PDF)
(And for the record I've split these paragraphs.)
“Instead, a gay or lesbian person can only gain the same rights under the statute as a heterosexual person by negating the very trait that defines gay and lesbian people as a class—their sexual orientation.And:
In re Marriage Cases, 183 P.3d at 441. The benefit denied by the marriage statute—the status of civil marriage for same-sex couples—is so “closely correlated with being homosexual” as to make it apparent the law is targeted at gay and lesbian people as a class.”
Religious doctrine and views contrary to this principle of law are unaffected, and people can continue to associate with the religion that best reflects their views.Thanks to BTB, Ex-Gay Watch, and Cynthia and Aunt Bea from TTF (and Iowa!), for making this post possible.
A religious denomination can still define marriage as a union between a man and a woman, and a marriage ceremony performed by a minister, priest, rabbi, or other person ordained or designated as a leader of the person’s religious faith does not lose its meaning as a sacrament or other religious institution.
The sanctity of all religious marriages celebrated in the future will have the same meaning as those celebrated in the past.
This has been an ocean of blood productions