Ted Olson Defends Same-Sex Marriage On Fox News Sunday

This was perhaps the most interesting of all of the interviews on the Sunday shows this morning. Ted Olson, former Solicitor General for George W. Bush and the man who argued and won Bush v. Gore before the Supreme Court in 2000, talking to Fox News’s Chris Wallace about last weeks ruling on Proposition 8:

H/T: Crooks and Liars

FILED UNDER: Gender Issues, Quick Takes, US Politics,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. Boyd says:

    Mr Olson employs some circular logic here. On the one hand he said that now-Justice Kagan was correct when she said “There is no constitutional right to same-sex marriage,” and then he also says that Judge Walker’s ruling isn’t judicial activism because he’s just applying the 14 Supreme Court decisions saying that marriage is a fundamental right. It sounds to me like he’s trying to have it both ways.
     
    I’m not taking a position on the question itself, I’m merely saying that Mr Olson appears to me to be promoting his personal preference rather than applying existing jurisprudence to the question.

  2. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    When Olson quoted the racial issue about marriage, race is not a choice.  Sexual preferrence is.  I just read the entire U.S. Constitution.  If found no right to marry in that document.  My question for Ted is, if there is a right to marry, why is it limited to just one partner?  I guess the right to marry must be hidden right next to the right to abortion and the right to sodomy.  Society has both the right and obligation to protect itself from factors which both weaken and diminish itself.  Whether natural (which I doubt) or by choice, the mutation to same sex behavior is not natural and serves no biological purpose.  Olson was and is wrong on this issue.  It will be reversed either by the 9th or by the SCOTUS.  The highest State court held it legal.

  3. HankP says:

    ZRIII, you apparently don’t understand the Constitution. Citizens have infinite rights, the Constitution just delineates the specific rights that citizens have granted to government.
     
    BTW, I’d like to see your proof that anything about homosexuality “weakens and diminishes” society.