It is absolutely stunning how rapidly the United States is evolving from a strong acceptance of the traditional definition of marriage as the joining of a husband and wife, further defined as the union of one man and one woman, to a new definition of marriage as the union of any adults (including those of the same sex, who incidentally could be gay, straight or anything in between). The use of the equal protection clause of the Constitution as an excuse to demand equal benefits, under a new definition of marriage, is an abuse of the law.
Like many of you, I did not want to consider this issue, as recently as one year ago. Same-sex couples should have all the same benefits as heterosexual married couples, inclusive of Social Security, health care, tax, property, visitation and survivor benefits. This could easily be accomplished by simply adding the words “and same-sex civil unions” to all the marriage laws at the federal, state and local levels.
The leaders of the gay community have run a brilliant blitzkrieg campaign, through the court system, pro-gay Hollywood and pro-gay media outlets, pinning the “bigot” label on anyone who dares to profess their belief in the traditional definition of marriage that has been accepted and respected since the dawn of civilization throughout the world. There are many people, based on private conversations, who are actually supporting gay marriage out of fear of being labeled as a bigot and possibly losing their job, their position, their business volume, or votes.
How many people are conceding to this “politically correct” agenda when answering the gay marriage question out of fear of being labeled a bigot, or how many feel pressured into thinking he or she is a bigot for adhering to a heart-felt belief in the traditional definition of marriage?
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to the Centre Daily Times
Tell me, would there have been such a strong push for “marriage equality,” on the part of the gay community, if all the same benefits could have been obtained through the recognition of same-sex civil unions? Without taking action on a sensible counter-proposal, as I have suggested, we will simply be run-over by the gay-marriage machine.
For those of us who are still willing to speak out in favor of the one man, one woman marriage definition, the following is worth repeating: Only a man and a woman can conceive children, together, as it was meant to be, for the purpose of forming a family unit, as ordained by God. This is truly a beautifully sacred thing! Mothers and fathers are important! Now, with frozen sperm and egg banks, designer-engineered babies, surrogate mothers, female husbands and male wives, the institutions of marriage and family are being trashed like never before.
The gutless federal judges and politicians who are ignoring natural law and going against their own internal beliefs, jumping on the gay-marriage bandwagon and overturning clear voter mandates supporting traditional marriage in many states, for the sake of being politically correct and avoiding the bigot label, are simply pathetic lemmings.
A few gay friends agree with me and are very much afraid of how far their gay leaders may go with their agenda. Will the day come when some federal judge, somewhere, sets a precedent by ordering a Catholic priest to perform a same-sex marriage under some lame interpretation of “equal protection” and “marriage equality”? That would be the trigger or tipping point that would set off a backlash revolution in this country from all those who are seething inside over this issue, now, but are too afraid to speak out, fearing retribution.
I encourage all of you to speak out and/or write! Let yourselves be heard! Don’t let your feelings fester. Forget political correctness! Do the right thing!
This is still a free country, and we have the right to free speech and freedom of religion, guaranteed by the Constitution’s First Amendment! At least, I thought so.