- Last Updated on 08:09 AM 03/27/13
- BY Dane Skelton
Two cases that could forever change the United States are being argued before the Supreme Court this week. The cases are as follows:
• Windsor v. United States could overturn the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) that codifies the traditional, historic definition of marriage as a covenant relationship between one man and one woman.
• Hollingsworth v. Perry could permanently overturn California’s amendment to preserve traditional marriage under Proposition 8.
With these cases our nation has reached a singular moment in its history. Should the plaintiffs prevail, the social contract and the legal landscape that we have taken for granted for the last 237 years will forever change. The United States that our children will inherit will be vastly different from the country our parents gave us. We are therefore responsible to face the facts about same sex marriage.
Much of the case for same sex marriage is built on myth, not facts, an appeal to emotion, not justice. What follows is a list of some of those myths followed by the relevant facts. Some of this is not pleasant reading. But all of us should have the facts before us and consider carefully what we should do about it.
• Myth: Homosexual marriage is just like heterosexual marriage: two people agree to live together in a sexually monogamous relationship.
• Facts: A 2010 study of same-sex couples in San Francisco showed that half are “open,” meaning that marriage partners consent to each other having sex with other people.
According to one man who lived as a homosexual until his mid-40s, legalizing homosexual marriage would be condoning “open’ lifestyles of almost totally non-monogamous sex and partner-swapping among marrieds, bi’s and gays that would make the orgies of Hugh Hefner look like a church picnic by comparison. If Americans could know the truth about what goes on with most members of the gay community, they’d be so repulsed they’d never even consider the idea of same-sex ‘marriages.”
• Myth: Same sex marriage will not affect traditional marriage.
• Facts: A 2010 New York Times article argued just the opposite, saying that same sex marriage could “rewrite the traditional rules of matrimony.” According to the article, homosexual marriage could illustrate for straights that monogamy isn’t necessarily a “central feature” of marriage and that “open relationships” could “point the way for the survival of the institution.”
In his book, “Virtually Normal,” well-known gay political commentator Andrew Sullivan wrote, “Among gay male relationships, the openness of the contract makes it more likely to survive than many heterosexual bonds…There is more likely to be a greater understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman.”
It is true that some advocates of same sex marriage want their unions to follow the monogamous patterns of traditional marriage. But if these two men are to be believed, that isn’t the norm now nor could we reasonably expect it to be in the future.
• Myth: Legalizing same sex marriage won’t affect other laws.
• Facts: Legalizing same sex marriage will radically affect our entire legal system, especially as it pertains to people of religious faith who as a matter of conscience oppose same sex marriage.
In a 12,000 word analysis of this issue, legal scholar Thomas M. Messner, who has clerked for Judge William H. Pryor Jr. on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit and practiced law in Washington, D.C., noted three major threats to religious liberty.
First, institutions that support the traditional understanding of marriage may be denied access to several types of government benefits, and individuals who work in the public sector may face censorship, disciplinary action and even loss of employment.
Second, those who support the traditional understanding of marriage will be subject to even greater civil liability under nondiscrimination laws that prohibit private discrimination based on sexual orientation, marital status and gender.
Third, the existence of nondiscrimination laws, combined with state administrative policies, can invite private forms of discrimination against religious individuals who believe that marriage involves a man and a woman and foster a climate of contempt for the public expression of their views.
• Myth: It isn’t fair to deny homosexual people the right to marry. Therefore, this is the civil rights issue of our day. Opposition to same sex marriage is like opposition to racial intermarriage, the equivalent of racism.
• Facts: The proponents of same sex marriage have an advantage in this debate that is peculiar to American culture: We love the underdog. All that the advocates of same sex marriage need to do is to portray themselves as the victims of injustice, bigotry and discrimination, and half the battle is won. They’ve been very successful with this strategy.
There is no denying that gay couples love each other, take care of each other and need legal means of handling one another’s financial, medical and legal affairs when age or sickness or death necessitates it. I have the authority to do that for my mom. But I obtained that authority through a well-known legal device called “power of attorney.” Anyone can get one for anyone else with the consent of the grantor.
Same sex marriage, however, is not the civil rights issue of our day. African Americans, Asians, Hispanics, Caucasians and other racial groups differ only in the color of their skin and the content of their character. Male and female are fundamentally different in nature and biology.
Through his eloquent references to scripture and through his powerful leadership Martin Luther King Jr. along with others like Jackie Robinson and Rosa Parks convinced America that black sporting events and white sporting events, black restrooms and white restrooms, black water fountains and white water fountains, were fundamentally immoral.
But in spite of attempts to prove the contrary, male and female are not equal on the playing field. Male and female clothing, restrooms and health care necessities must accommodate our peculiar biology. Males and females are, to this day, divided by their sexual nature. The comparisons to the civil rights movement are false.
Finally, those most affected by gay marriage, those who have the most to lose, are children.
• Myth: Same sex couples can provide all of the love, nurture and education a child needs to flourish in this world.
No doubt some children raised by gay couples have done well. But, the exception does not disprove the rule that the best situation for children is a home with a mom and a dad who stay together and raise the children.
• Fact: One a gay man who divorced his wife in order to fulfill his same sex desires, speaks powerfully on the inability of gay marriage to meet the needs of children.
In an article written for “Public Discourse,” this man explained that after 10 years of the gay lifestyle, he voluntarily gave it up and moved back in with his ex-wife.
The man is not a Christian. He did not do this because the Bible teaches that male and female is God’s design. He did it for his two adopted sons.
He writes that, over the course of 10 years, he realized that “creating a family with another man is not completely equal to creating a family with a woman.” He also says that “denying children parents of both genders is an objective evil. Kids need and yearn for both.”
He illustrated his point with a story about watching his typically rowdy teenage son kiss his mother.
“With two dads in the house, this little moment of warmth and tenderness would never have occurred. … To be fully formed, children need to be free to generously receive from and express affection to parents of both genders.”
He continues, saying, “Gay and lesbian activists, and more importantly, the progressives urging them on, seek to redefine marriage in order to achieve an ideological agenda that ultimately seeks to undefine families as nothing more than one of an array of equally desirable ‘social units,’ and thus open the door to the increase of government’s role in our lives.”
“Genderless marriage is not marriage at all,” he wrote. “It is something else entirely. Marriage is not an elastic term. It is immutable. It offers the very best for children and society.”
Many more compelling arguments can be made in support of traditional marriage. Please add your voice to the support of it by contacting your representatives in Washington and asking them to pressure the Supreme Court to keep Defense of Marriage Act and Proposition 8 in place.