California Supreme Court Does the Right Thing...For Now

The Washington Times reported that the California Supreme Court found that Mayor Gavin Newsom had overstepped his mayoral powers in granting more than 4,000 homosexual couples marriage licenses. There's no doubt that the Mayor overstepped his bounds. I don't think anyone really thought that a mayor of any city has the right to change state laws. It was a purely political maneuver. Towards the end of the article (isn't it interesting that the most telling quotes are usually near the end of the article?) the reporter writes this:

When the California Supreme Court agreed to hear the San Francisco case, the justices said they would decide only whether Mr. Newsom overstepped his mayoral powers. But they noted they could also entertain a constitutional challenge -regarding whether homosexual couples should be treated the same as heterosexual couples under the California Constitution - if such a lawsuit were to reach them.

Now this quote from this article was not a direct quote from the justices, but it seems to me by the way that it is worded, that the justices will eventually rule that prohibiting same-sex marriage as unconstitutional. Here's the line that says this:

...regarding whether homosexual couples should be treated the same as heterosexual couples under the California Constitution...

Just the fact that they stated it that there is an unequal treatment between homosexuals and heterosexuals shows what will eventually happen. The thing is, it's backward thinking. There is no equality. Any man has the exact same opportunity to marry any woman that any other man has and the same goes for any woman has the exact same opportunity to marry any man that any other woman has. I understand that this will set homosexuals off because they do not want to marry people of the opposite sex, but that doesn't change the fact that, under the law, they are equal to heterosexuals.

I have no problem with civil unions or other legal contracts between homosexual couples, but lets leave marriage out of it. We do not have to redefine an institution that has been around for thousands of years in just about every society just so that a small group can have their relationships sanctioned by the government. Let them develop their own institution, but leave marriage out of it.