1. Goodridge v. Department of Public Health 440 Mass. 309 (2003) allows same-sex marriage, commonly spoken of as gay marriage by judicial decree.
2. Goodridge was ruled on a rational basis, with the information presented to the court.
3. Will Goodridge sustain a direct legal challenge? This legal challenge to overturn Goodridge is excising my legal right to pursue an answer to this question.
4. The parameters of the discussion of homosexuality are best framed by; Who one is, a homosexual or What one does, homosexuality. The latter receives the strongest support.
5. No one is born a homosexual. One may overcome homosexuality.
6. The plaintiff, Larry Houston, chooses to self-identify as a former homosexual.
7. Thus Goodridge may be seen as furthering the continuation of the legitimatization and normalization of homosexuality, homosexual behavior.
8. Therefore overturning Goodridge meets a rational basis test for sustaining two of the original claims may by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, (1) ensuring the optimal setting for child rearing, that the department defines as a two parent-parent family with one parent of each sex, (2) preserving scarce State and private financial resources.
9. Therefore overturning Goodridge reaffirms the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in that in broad terms it is the Legislature’s power and authority to enact orders, rules, and laws to regulate conduct, to the extent that such orders, rules and laws are necessary to secure the health, safety, good order, comfort, or general welfare of the community.
10. Plaintiff Larry Houston is a resident of Somerville, Middlesex County, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
11. Defendant Department of Public Health is a department of the executive branch of the Commonwealth established and governed by G.L. chapter 17.
12. Defendant Paul Cote is the Commissioner of the Department of Public Health.
13. This court has jurisdiction pursuant G.L. c.231A, *1.
14. The Attorney General is charged to appear for the Commonwealth, its departments and officers in cases in which the Commonwealth its interested or in which the acts or doings of the departments and officers are called into question pursuant to G.L. c. 12, * 3. The Attorney General has been or shortly will be served with a copy of this action.
Continue reading: Larry Houston