... and rightly so! Here is one very common sense reason, as stated in the Judge's opinion:
"Marriage in the United States has always been a civil matter. Civil authorities may permit religious leaders to solemnize marriages but not to determine who may enter or leave a civil marriage. Religious leaders may determine independently whether to recognize a civil marriage or divorce but that recognition or lack thereof has no effect on the relationship under state law.
Which is why people like me can get "ordained" on the internet and perform marriages, because NOTHING I do at the ceremony makes it legal. What makes a marriage legal is the government-issued legal document that the couple signs and files.
I have always maintained that these homophobic laws to deny legal rights to one set of Americans that are granted to another set of Americans would eventually be judged unconstitutional by a judge who has the courage to uphold the Constitution of the U.S.
I have always maintained that there is no such thing as "gay marriage" when it comes to law. There is marriage, and marriage is a set of legal contracts as well as an emotional commitment.
Denying any American the legal rights enjoyed by another American is a civil rights issue, not a gay issue.
This is far from over, as the Christian Right will pitch a fit. But eventually, Americans will look back on this and be amazed that this country ever had laws that denied legal rights to any of its citizens.
But remember, women have only had the right to vote here for 90 years... And that was a looooonnnnngggggg and very ugly fight.
Yet today, no one would take seriously any "argument" that women don't have the mental capacity to decide who to vote for. But in the 1800s and early 1900s, there were still those who believed that nonsense.