This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2015, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

Before you can have Judgment Day, you have to have Argument Day.

Utah is not officially a party to the same-sex marriage cases that were argued Tuesday before the Supreme Court of the United States. But we're watching.

— Outcome of same-sex marriage case hard to predict — Dennis Romboy | The Deseret News

" ... Should the Supreme Court find that gay and lesbian couples have a right to marry under the Constitution, nothing in Utah would change. But should the court decide that states can make their own marriage laws, the implications are unclear.

"[University of Utah Law Professor Cliff] Rosky said the latter result would be 'chaos.'

" 'That would be an ugly day,' he said.

— Statement on Supreme Court Same Sex Marriage Arguments — Utah Attorney General's Office:

" ... We are pleased that the court has chosen to hear arguments on this historic challenge and to ultimately make it possible for all citizens to have clarity and resolution."

Hmmm. The only way to have "clarity and resolution" is for the court to rule that the Constitution requires all states to recognize same-sex marriage. Any other ruling will keep the issue up in the air, state to state, case to case. "Chaos."

— Utahns rally for and against same-sex marriage — Jennifer Dobner | The Salt Lake Tribune

" ... 'This is not a settled question, one judge forced it on us,' Utah Eagle Forum President Gayle Ruzicka said before the start of the rally. 'The people voted to say marriage is between a man and a woman. We're never going to be through fighting this battle.' ... "

Or will we be through, 'round about the end of June. You know, the month for weddings.

Elseweb:

— A Landmark Gay Marriage Case at the Supreme Court — New York Times Editorial

" ... Opponents of marriage equality are not going down without a fight. And that is a major reason the court needs to resolve, finally, the question it has been dodging for more than four decades: Is there a constitutional right to same-sex marriage? ..."

— How the battle for gay marriage was won — Dana Milbank | The Washington Post

"The biblical-marriage demonstrators were outnumbered 5-to-1 or more outside the Supreme Court Tuesday morning, but they were not lacking in vitriol or vulgarity.

" 'Homo Sex is Sin,' proclaimed one banner. A sign showed stick figures in an anal-sex position and the words 'Fag is Sin.' 'Dirty Homo, Stop Sinning,' proclaimed another large banner.

"A woman holding a sign that said 'Fags Are Beasts' led a group of demonstrators in singing a parody of the Sam Smith and Mary J. Blige tune 'Stay With Me' called 'Fag Marriage, It Can't Be,' and in a parody of Green Day's 'American Idiot': 'You wanna be an American sodomite/One nation controlled by fag media.'

"With opponents like these, is it any wonder that the cause of gay equality is prevailing? ..."

— Same-sex marriage has the moral high ground — Washington Post Editorial

"Tuesday's oral arguments before the Supreme Court on the constitutionality of same-sex marriage illustrated a perhaps underappreciated benefit of bringing such a momentous question before the justices: It enabled both sides to present their best arguments, at length, in a setting that guaranteed they would be thoroughly tested and probed. No citizen who cares about this issue could fail to learn from this debate among lawyers and justices.

"And the main lesson was how little remains of the argument against recognizing a right to same-sex marriage under the Constitution. ..."

— Love, Marriage and Music — Frank Bruni | The New York Times

" ... But it's important to step back and remember what this is really about: the most exquisite emotion that any of us can have, the most exalted bond, and whether we're content to tell one group of Americans that their love is less dignified — and less worthy of celebration — than another group's. ..."

— Ruth Bader Ginsburg eviscerates same-sex marriage opponents in court — Dan Roberts | The Guardian

" 'Marriage today is not what it was under the common law tradition, under the civil law tradition,' said Ginsburg when Justices Roberts and Kennedy began to fret about whether the court had a right to challenge centuries of tradition.

" 'Marriage was a relationship of a dominant male to a subordinate female," she explained. 'That ended as a result of this court's decision in 1982 when Louisiana's Head and Master Rule was struck down … Would that be a choice that state should [still] be allowed to have? To cling to marriage the way it once was?'

" 'No,' replied John Bursch, the somewhat chastised lawyer for the states who are seeking to preserve their ban on gay marriage. ..."

— Hitched to gay marriage: It's too late for the Supreme Court to turn back the clock on Adam and Steve — New York Daily News Editorial

— Are Republicans at War With Their Own Future? — Matt Taibbi | Rolling Stone

" ... Forget that gay marriage is mostly uncontroversial for anyone born after disco, and that young Republicans also support it in massive numbers ..."