OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) – The state Supreme Court has heard arguments on whether same-sex couples should be allowed to marry in Washington State.

Supporters and opponents of same-sex marriage traded barbs and jostled for position on the courthouse steps before the hearing, while 5,000 people rallied at the Capitol in support of traditional, heterosexual marriage.

Arguments ranged broadly outside the courtroom, but inside the packed chamber the Supreme Court justices honed in on specific, constitutional questions.

The 38 plaintiffs in the case – 19 gay and lesbian couples seeking to marry – are challenging the constitutionality of the state’s 1998 Defense of Marriage Act, which limits marriage to heterosexual couples.

“What the evidence shows in this case is that marriage is a good thing for children and marriage is a good thing for couples,” American Civil Liberties Union attorney Paul Lawrence said. “We’re simply asking for more of that good thing.”

“Isn’t that policy debate better taken over to the Legislature?” Justice Jim Johnson asked.

“We’re here because of the Washington state constitution,” Lawrence replied.

The plaintiffs’ attorneys argued that the same-sex marriage ban violates the state constitution prohibition against granting privileges to one group of citizens and not another. The plaintiffs also argued the ban violates the state’s Equal Rights Amendment.

Attorneys defending the marriage law said the state has a rational reason for limiting marriage to heterosexual couples because the state has an interest in regulating relationships that produce children.

“There is no history and tradition of same-sex marriage in the state of Washington,” said assistant attorney general William Collins, who defended the Defense of Marriage Act.

“But there is a fundamental right to marry, is there not?” asked Justice Bobbe Bridge.

“There is, but the only time that right has been recognized is in the context of a man and a woman,” Collins replied.

Justices questioned both sides sharply, as is their custom – even practiced court-watchers don’t predict how the court will rule based on arguments. The court usually takes at least several months to decide. Meanwhile, the public policy debate will rage on as it did outside the courtroom.

“We hope to have an end to religious values overriding civil liberties,” said Valerie Tibbett of Friday Harbor. “When one group uses its numbers and religious dogma to take rights away from the rest of us, it’s not the right thing.”

Tibbett and her partner, Pamela Coffey, have been together 33 years and are plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

“We’re both hopeful the justices will see the light, and see the constitutionality of what we’re asking for,” Coffey said.

Plaintiff Judy Fleissner, from Seattle, waited outside the courthouse for hours with her partner, Chris Gamache, and their two children, ages 8 and 5.

“I think ignorance breeds fear,” Fleissner said as same-sex marriage opponents waved signs around her family. “We’re just like everyone else – we do our multiplication tables, T-ball practices and dance lessons.”

After the 90-minute hearing, Gamache was exhausted, optimistic and nervous.

“It’s a really important decision for us. It impacts us in so many ways,” she said.

About 200 same-sex marriage supporters mixed with opponents on the courthouse steps, while a nearby rally opposing same-sex marriage drew about 5,000 people.

“The tide of family breakdown, including divorce and out-of-wedlock births, must be turned,” Aaron Haskins, pastor of City Church in Kirkland, told the crowd. “We care so much about strengthening marriage, we do not want it to be weakened by redefining marriage.”

The rally opened with Christian and patriotic songs, and closed with a prayer. Organizers set up a children’s activity tent and a prayer corner in the back. Many people carried red-and-white signs printed up with the words “Marriage, One Man One Woman.” Others made their own signs: “Same Sex Marriage: Abomination in the Eyes of God” and “Jesus Saves from Hell” were two examples.

Most of the rally speakers said they wanted to build up traditional marriage rather than tear down same-sex couples.

“It is not about bigotry… it is not about hate, it is about the love of a husband for his wife,” said pastor Joe Fuiten, president of Washington Evangelicals for Responsible Government, which sponsored the rally. Moments later, he accused “a small group of homosexual extremists” of putting marriage “under siege in Washington State.”

Jay and Mercy Rich of Redmond, who will celebrate their fifth marriage anniversary soon, said they attended the rally because reserving marriage for heterosexuals is a core value for them.

“If there’s no right and wrong, what’s going to keep anyone from doing anything?” said Jay Rich, 25. “They can live together and do what they want, but marriage is…”

Mercy Rich, 24, finished his thought. “Sacred,” she said.