With the same-sex marriage issue forefront in the news, it seems a lesser thing to write on any other topic. With good reason; this movement will reposition our culture, and it therefore requires a clear public airing of the facts. Many mistakenly assume this issue will have little impact on traditional families. Not so. Any movement that can fundamentally change society will fundamentally affect us all.
We
are bombarded with opinions that same-sex marriage is a constitutional
right, that our national commitment to equality requires us to accept
homosexual unions. This is untrue; there is no constitutional right to
marriage. The United States Constitution is silent on the topic. By
default, then, the matter becomes a state prerogative, according to the
10th Amendment, "The powers not delegated to the United States (the
federal government) by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the
States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
Restated, each state, and its voters, set its marriage laws.
The federal government has no say in any part of the marriage issue. The actions, decisions and manipulations by the federal government, its judges and courts, concerning marriage are unconstitutional; make that illegal. That position was reiterated by the Supreme Court's DOMA decision in June, 2013 that said that the states set marriage rights. This issue comes home to Utahns after Judge Shelby's illegal ruling against Utah's marriage amendment a few weeks ago. State Representative LaVar Christensen, attorney, author and sponsor of Utah's marriage-between-a-man-and-a-woman amendment to the Utah Constitution, which passed with 66 percent approval in 2004, says there is no established, recognized, legal federal authority that can legitimately overturn Utah's marriage law. Period.
Throughout history, marriage has been not only a continuing institution, but a contract issued to those whose lifestyle is likely to promote the culture's well-being. We encourage what benefits us. Heterosexual marriage is history's norm. It has to be; posterity must continue if the culture is to continue. Gay rights activists call this a "myth." Hardly, few facts are more biologically unarguable than this: no male and female union = no baby; no babies = no continuing society.
Another aspect of the equality issue needs to be addressed. If equality is just for our generation, we abandon the future. We have to ask, "Equality for whom?" The media and the same-sex culture define equality as the right of homosexuals to marry. That limited application leaves out future generations. What about equality for them? Is gay marriage in the best interest of generations that follow ours?
A mountain of research and recently accumulated information from areas where gay marriage has been legal for the last decade -- Massachusetts, for example -- clearly shows why history sanctions heterosexual unions. More detail and public discussion is needed on this topic, but in short, children need both father and mother. Their differing styles of love create wholeness for the child. Accumulating statistics from research, such as the New Family Structure Study by Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin, show that children from heterosexual marriages fare far better in almost every social context. They are much more likely to make better grades and stay in school, have fewer mental health issues, fewer out-of-wedlock babies and fewer problems with the law. The domestic violence and child abuse rates are lower in traditional families, children are much less likely to experience sexual abuse, and children from heterosexual marriages are much less likely to receive government welfare.
As we in Utah are pressed into making decisions about same sex marriage, we must address the issue of "Equality for whom?" The right of gay and lesbian couples to partner and build a life together is indisputable and is not the issue; legalization of that bond is. It is not discrimination that drives the discussion, but the best interests of society and our future generations. We cannot forget that.
The federal government has no say in any part of the marriage issue. The actions, decisions and manipulations by the federal government, its judges and courts, concerning marriage are unconstitutional; make that illegal. That position was reiterated by the Supreme Court's DOMA decision in June, 2013 that said that the states set marriage rights. This issue comes home to Utahns after Judge Shelby's illegal ruling against Utah's marriage amendment a few weeks ago. State Representative LaVar Christensen, attorney, author and sponsor of Utah's marriage-between-a-man-and-a-woman amendment to the Utah Constitution, which passed with 66 percent approval in 2004, says there is no established, recognized, legal federal authority that can legitimately overturn Utah's marriage law. Period.
Throughout history, marriage has been not only a continuing institution, but a contract issued to those whose lifestyle is likely to promote the culture's well-being. We encourage what benefits us. Heterosexual marriage is history's norm. It has to be; posterity must continue if the culture is to continue. Gay rights activists call this a "myth." Hardly, few facts are more biologically unarguable than this: no male and female union = no baby; no babies = no continuing society.
Another aspect of the equality issue needs to be addressed. If equality is just for our generation, we abandon the future. We have to ask, "Equality for whom?" The media and the same-sex culture define equality as the right of homosexuals to marry. That limited application leaves out future generations. What about equality for them? Is gay marriage in the best interest of generations that follow ours?
A mountain of research and recently accumulated information from areas where gay marriage has been legal for the last decade -- Massachusetts, for example -- clearly shows why history sanctions heterosexual unions. More detail and public discussion is needed on this topic, but in short, children need both father and mother. Their differing styles of love create wholeness for the child. Accumulating statistics from research, such as the New Family Structure Study by Mark Regnerus of the University of Texas at Austin, show that children from heterosexual marriages fare far better in almost every social context. They are much more likely to make better grades and stay in school, have fewer mental health issues, fewer out-of-wedlock babies and fewer problems with the law. The domestic violence and child abuse rates are lower in traditional families, children are much less likely to experience sexual abuse, and children from heterosexual marriages are much less likely to receive government welfare.
As we in Utah are pressed into making decisions about same sex marriage, we must address the issue of "Equality for whom?" The right of gay and lesbian couples to partner and build a life together is indisputable and is not the issue; legalization of that bond is. It is not discrimination that drives the discussion, but the best interests of society and our future generations. We cannot forget that.
