"All in the Family"

The MoJ congregation will no doubt be divided in its reaction, but some might join me in shouting "Amen" to Gerry Bradley's piece, posted today at Public Discourse, entitled "All in the Family."  On one of Gerry's central claims we may even have unanimity (though I can't say for sure, since I don't know whether there are any orthodox Rawlsians among us), namely, law and the state cannot be (not only should not be, but cannot be, so will not be) morally neutral with respect to the now controversial question of what marriage really is. In other words, if the law recognizes and honors marriages or sexual partnerships of any type, it will be favoring one substantive moral view of the meaning and value of marriage over competing conceptions. The key thing is for lawmakers to do their best to make sure that their handiwork embodies the soundest view.  As to which view is the soundest, well. that's where disagreement breaks out in full flower.  But if we're arguing about that, and not about moral neutrality, then at least we're having the right argument.  Here's the link to Gerry's piece:  http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2009/10/938