I've had a chance to do a little research into the U.S. District Court's ruling that struck down California's Proposition 8, which outlawed same-sex marriage in California. Activists on both sides of the law seem to think this case will go to the U.S. Supreme Court for a final ruling.

In his ruling, Judge Vaughn Walker wrote, "the evidence shows conclusively that moral and religious views form the only basis for a belief that same-sex couples are different from opposite-sex couples. These interests do not provide a rational basis for supporting Prop 8.

Supporters for Prop 8 are describing this as an outright attack on religion that is protected under the first amendment. Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony released a statement on Wednesday that said, "those of us who supported Prop 8 and worked for its passage did so for one reason: We believe that marriage was instituted by God for the specific purpose of carrying out God's plan for the world and society. Period." I think that statement sums up the judge's thoughts on "moral and religious views."

Howard Friedman, a law professor at Ohio University said, "Judge Walker is not attacking religion per se; he is just not giving religious expression any special consideration." He went on to say, "Judge Walker is basically saying that a private moral view isn't a rational basis for legislation."

It will be interesting to see how this whole thing works out.