The United States Supreme Court is hearing arguments in cases that could make same-sex marriage the law of the land. The justices are weighing whether the Constitution gives gay and lesbian couples the right to marry — or, if individual states can legally define marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Despite polls showing a rise in support of same-sex marriage, the issue remains a very divisive one for Americans.

Why Chief Justice John Roberts Might Support Gay Marriage

Joseph Landau – The New York Times

Putting aside previous cases and previous votes, there are a number of institutional reasons Chief Justice Roberts might, and should, cast a vote for the freedom to marry.

First, a Supreme Court ruling authorizing the states to restrict marriage to heterosexual couples would lead to enormous confusion. The court’s decision not to take appeals of earlier cases, or put other appeals of lower court decisions on hold, has induced many couples to marry. Surely, same-sex couples who married when marriage was legal under prior court rulings would remain so.

As chief justice, Mr. Roberts occupies a unique place in the judiciary. While it is not his job to simply validate the decisions of the lower court judges — the Supreme Court should reverse the lower courts when they err — having faith in the lower federal judiciary, and showing respect for the dialogue between the Supreme Court and lower federal courts, might be especially appropriate here.

Citizens, Not Judges, Should Determine Future of Marriage

Ryan T. Anderson – The Heritage Foundation

Here’s the bottom line: Whatever people may think about marriage as a policy matter, everyone should be able to recognize the U.S. Constitution does not settle this question. Unelected judges shouldn’t insert their own policy preferences about marriage and then say the Constitution requires them everywhere.

There simply is nothing in the Constitution that requires all 50 states to redefine marriage.

After all, the overarching question before the Supreme Court is not whether a male–female marriage policy is the best, but only whether it is allowed by the Constitution. Nor is it whether government-recognized same-sex marriage is good or bad policy, but only whether it is required by the Constitution.

Children Like Me Need a Voice In Gay Marriage Debate

 Katy Faust – USA Today

My mother has been in a committed relationship with another woman for nearly 30 years. And I am the co-author of a Supreme Court amicus brief in favor of allowing states to affirm marriage as the union of one man and one woman in their laws.

Given the fact that my mother and I enjoy a close, loving relationship, and I believe that every American — gay or straight — should be permitted to form consensual adult unions of their choosing, how could I take that position? …

Children have a right to their mother and father, who happen to be the two adults with whom they innately long to be in relationship. In the pantheon of rights, and pseudo rights, I submit that the right to one’s mother and father is the most self-evident right of all — save perhaps parents’ right to their natural children … Being deprived a relationship with one or both natural parents causes emotional damage and,statistically, an increased likelihood of physical, psychological and economic harm.

GOP Candidates Swim Against the Tide in Gay Marriage

Eugene Robinson – The Washington Post

For much of the country, gay marriage is becoming old news. But you would never know that from listening to the GOP presidential hopefuls, who play rhetorical Twister whenever the issue is raised.

Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) … is typically vocal and uncompromising in his opposition to gay marriage, maintaining that the “traditional” definition is “ordained by God.”

But when he attended a recent New York fundraiser hosted by two gay businessmen, a perfect setting for one of his tour de force demonstrations of confrontational rhetoric, Cruz mostly maintained a mouselike silence on the subject. He did offer that if one of his daughters were gay, he’d be fine with that.

For an increasing number of Americans, opposing same-sex marriage means being anti-gay. Being pro-gay and anti-gay at the same time is something not even a candidate with Cruz’s gift of gab can pull off.