Where is Gay Marriage Legal: Mexico Supreme Court Rules In Favor Of Same Sex Couples

Mexico's Supreme Court has ruled that a law in the southern Oaxaca state, that bans same-sex marriages, is unconstitutional, paving the way for same-sex couples to marry in that state and possibly in the rest of Mexico. In a unanimous decision on Wednesday, the tribunal struck down an Oaxaca state law that declares that "one of the purposes of marriage is the perpetuation of the species."

In its ruling, the court declared that to restrict marriages to the union of one man and one woman "violates the principle of equality."

Currently, same-sex marriage is only legally allowed in Mexico City, where a same-sex marriage law was enacted in 2010. The court's ruling comes from a lawsuit filed by three gay couples against the state of Oaxaca. Despite the historic influence of Catholicism on Mexican culture, gay marriage advocates are celebrating this ruling as a momentous milestone for human rights.

 “It’s a big advance [and] a large step for other claims that will surely come in time,” said Antonio Medina, an activist who helped lead the fight for couples’ rights in Mexico City to Salon on Wednesday. “It’s a significant step, without a doubt.”

A blog titled After Marriage is an apt title for the question that follows: What happens after same-sex marriage is legalized?

In a forthcoming book What is Marriage by Sherif Girgis, Robert P. George, and Ryan T. Anderson, based upon an essay originally published in the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, these three scholars explore the logic and consequences of the traditional and revisionist approaches to marriage.

"Redefining marriage will also harm the material interests of couples and children,” reads the book. “As more people absorb the new law's lesson that marriage is fundamentally about emotions, marriages will increasingly take on emotion's tyrannical inconstancy."

As the pro-gay marriage movement, cloaked in the rhetoric of a campaign for human rights, gains momentum, have we stopped to consider the effects on the family? Many of us are familiar with the classic nursery rhyme, “first comes love, then comes marriage....” What happens to the baby in the baby carriage?

On February 24, 2012, a ruling from the Inter-American Court states that the American Convention on Human Rights led to the prohibition of “any rule, act, or discriminatory practice based on sexual orientation.” This ruling arose from a case, Karen Atala Riffo y Niñas v. Chile – brought by a Chilean lesbian who was denied custody of her children because of her sexual orientation.

Today, such rulings such go virtually unquestioned. The ramifications of raising children by a parent embracing an alternative sexual lifestyle are rarely discussed. Mom decides to live with a woman, and suddenly she deserves to keep her children at all costs.

“Most people accept that marriage is also deeply – indeed, in an important sense, uniquely – oriented to having and rearing children,” reads George’s article, "What is Marriage?"

“That is, it is the kind of relationship that by its nature is oriented to, and enriched by, the bearing and rearing of children,” it states.

As voices across North America speak out in favor of same-sex marital unions, the question of what’s best for the child has been drowned out. The tyranny of emotion has appointed human feeling the arbiter of marriage law. It should be no surprise, if the consideration of the children’s stability falls subservient to the demand of same-sex desire. There are many studies pointing to the enormous advantage on the child’s side, regarding a childhood raised by both biological parents.

Whatever the reason – divorce, death, or homosexual parenting – there is a distinct developmental disadvantage to children raised with the absence of a biological mother and father. Regardless of the reasons, research overwhelmingly points to an overwhelming advantage on the side of traditional parenting.

"As these norms weaken, so will the emotional and material security that marriage gives spouses," reads the book, What is Marriage.

The weakening of norms and corrosion of security that arises from the legalization of same-sex marriage, compounded with the dwindling institution of traditional marriage makes stability in our family communities virtually absent. When human beings can marry or divorce on a virtual whim, from what source can our children draw stability?

The societal trend toward the tyranny of emotions goes hand-in-hand with the past acceptance of no-fault divorce laws, which make marriages "easier to break than contracts of any other sort." Perhaps next the human right to same-sex divorce will be the next clarion call for human equality.

The court declared that Mexican law against same-sex marriage "violates the principle of equality." Indeed it does. The court also ruled against “discriminatory practice based on sexual orientation.” Sex by nature violates the principle of equality, as it is a discriminatory practice that only allows one man and one woman to conceive a child. Sexual intercourse violates the principle of equality by virtue of its existence. It essentially recognizes the fact that man and woman are biologically different. Why is it offensive for the law to recognize this as well?