What's next after Supreme Court decision on same gender marriage?

In summary, here are some issues that follow from the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision on same gender marriage.  I plan to comment on each in succeeding posts, but here is the summary.

1. Will the decision strengthen or unravel marriage?

Justice Kennedy's majority opinion, and some parts of the movement, sold gay marriage in traditionalist, pro-marriage terms.  The idea is simple enough:  (some) gay people want the privileges (and limitations and obligations) of marriage, just as (some) heterosexuals do.  Justice Kennedy's majority opinion is written as a homage to marriage as an institution.   However, it is also possible to see gay marriage as a part of the unraveling of the traditional family, including marriage, which will eventually lead to marriage being less central to society.   Certainly, in many Western nations fewer people are getting married, fewer people are having children, and more people are raising children outside of marriage.   So which will it be?   This is not something that can be settled in words but will happen over decades and longer.   Will the societies with same-gender marriage be the societies where marriage over time weakens?   

2. Will the right to marry become the right to a child?

For example, does "marriage equality" require legalization of commercial surrogacy? The surrogacy industry has sought and sometimes obtained (i.e., California) legal regimens in which the surrogates are reduced to "gestational carriers" with no rights ever to the child (mere baby-sitters), the children created by ART (assisted reproductive technology) have no rights ever to their information (as even the original birth certificates contain only "intended" contractual parents); and commercial surrogacy is allowed despite its apparent commercialization of children (i.e., baby selling). My own view is that this surrogacy regimen represents the right to a child mentality, the commercialization of children, and the exploitation I and many others have been fighting on the adoption front for years. To be clear---heterosexuals have been the primary drivers of this "right to a child" mentality. But both before and after the Supreme Court's marriage ruling some are arguing that marriage equality and gay rights requires these pro-ART/surrogacy regimens, since two men (for example) should be allowed to rent a womb and buy an egg to be able to have a child---and surely to be equal they have a "right to a child." Most of Europe and the world legally agrees with me on this one (U.S. law is divided), but will the marriage equality movement become a significant force in this battle? Or can we effectively separate the right to marry from a right to surrogacy?

3. Will law and society eventually be forced to recognize plural/polygamous marriage as well?

CJ Roberts' dissent noted that there is more historical precedent for polygamy than for same-gender marriage, and that the logic of the majority opinion should lead to a legal recognition of polygamy.  Of course this is a not just an issue for the adults involved, but also for the children raised in those environments---particularly since in some splinter Mormon groups the government has been deeply concerned with teenagers and minors pressured into such marriages by their parents and group---and groomed for this way of life from an early age.  Yet, it may not be fair to stigmatize all involved in these kinds of marriages for the actions of these particular groups.  (Of course, the mainstream Mormon Church long ago ceased practicing polygamous marriage, but there are significant numbers in these splinter groups who do not accept that change.)

4. What will happen to divisions within religious groups as to same sex marriage?

Since I know it best, I will comment primarily on divisions within Christianity.  Within the West in particular we have developed forms of Christianity that are and will practice same-gender marriage.  (For example, the mainline Presbyterian Church recently defined marriage as two persons (any gender), and the Episcopal Church in the U.S. is the midst of doing that this week.)   On the other hand, many churches in the West and the rest of the world (such as evangelical, Roman Catholic, and Orthodox) do not practice same-gender marriage---meaning, they will not "marry" two people of the same gender.   Again, there are two views.  One is that same gender marriage is the wave of the future, and religions that accept it will eventually be the future.  On the other hand, from another point of view, Christian churches that accept same-gender marriage are another part of the story of the decline of liberal Christianity--another step of the dismantling rather than the strengthening of Christian faith.  From this point of view, acceptance of same-gender marriage will hasten the already-existing decline of liberal and "mainline" churches.   Again, while this can be debated in words, it will be determined in the actions of millions of people over decades.   Which churches will be thriving and growing in thirty (or fifty, or two hundred) years, the ones that accepted same gender marriage, or the ones that did not?  

 5. Right to Marriage and anti-discrimination versus Religious Freedom

This is the issue that is getting the most press thus far and so most are familiar with it.  What will happen to religious persons and institutions that in various ways do not want to be involved with or recognize same-gender marriage?   Justice Kennedy's defense of religious freedom was very weak because it spoke in terms of belief and advocacy, but said nothing about practice.   Justice Kennedy's prior opinion in Christian Legal Society v. Martinez does not bode well for advocates of religious freedom on these issues.   More on this later....

6.  The Clash of Civilizations, or the West versus the Rest

If you look at a map of which nations accept same-gender marriage, it is basically the West versus the Rest---with the main exception being some Latin American nations accepting same gender marriage, largely through judicial opinions.    Other cultures, nations, and civilizations are increasingly defining the West by its acceptance of same gender marriage, and themselves in opposition to same-gender marriage.   How far will the West go in trying to use its international power and influence to further an agenda of furthering gay marriage?  How will other nations and cultures develop over time?  Wrapped in this question is another one:  globally speaking, what is the future of gay marriage?  Is it the future of the world, or is it only the present of one particular part of the world?  

David Smolin