The Constitutional protection to equal rights under the law has been invoked over and over again to try and afford homosexuals “equal right” to the social institution of marriage and to social security when one legal spouse dies.
This paper argues that the majority of the American people refuse to countenance homosexual marriage, that this moral stand has held steady against the specious propaganda of the liberal press, and that legal statutes define marriage as between one man and one woman.
America cannot afford to give credence and legal standing to a fringe element of society.
What seems “fashionable” and “progressive” thinking cannot be equated with ethical behavior. During the Vietnam War, the actions of Jane Fonda and draft dodgers roiled the nation. Every generation of teenagers like to rebel by smoking, binge drinking, and risking life and limb in drag racing and contests of “chicken” but the least that be said is that all these are bad for their health. Parents shrug that their children in middle school will indulge their curiosity about sex no matter what but the sorry wrecks of teenage pregnancies, single motherhood, and underage abortions are all around for us to see. Today, those who like to indulge in marijuana, other illicit drugs, and prostitution say they harm no one but themselves so why not break the law?
Illicit and perverted licentiousness cannot be given the legal sanction of marriage.
The courts and legislature cannot “legalize” homosexuality and protect it from moral condemnation and social scorn (Gallagher 1). In the same way, the right of consenting adolescents and adults to engage in premarital sex, adultery, incest, statutory rape, child assault, domestic violence, sadomasochistic acts, and child pornography all confront widespread disapproval and legal sanction.
Homosexuals began to agitate for “equal rights” to marriage in the post-Vietnam era.
By the mid-1990s, the backlash became so great that Congress passed the “Defense of Marriage Act of 1996”. The nation’s law forbids the federal government from granting the civil rights and protections of marriage to any couple except one man and one woman.
It is a myth that America is moving towards a consensus of approval. The well-respected series of annual NORC General Social Surveys reveal a clear majority across the nation oppose (59%) homosexual marriages versus only one-third who favor these. Those who disapprove do so on explicit moral and religious grounds. Other opinion surveys compiled by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (1) reveal the extent of public opposition to homosexual marriage.
The protections extended to men and women who marry, reinforced by the Defense of Marriage Act (Public Law No. 104-199, 110 Stat. 2419) of 1996, can be rationalized as safeguarding women who may not have the ability or financial capacity to rear natural offspring if abandoned by husbands (The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life 1).
In 2006 voting, a total of seven states – Colorado, Idaho, South Dakota, South Carolina, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Tennessee – added to the 20 around the union that, like California, now boasted constitutional amendments defining marriage as, legally speaking, between one man and a woman (Anonymous 14). In contrast, the tally of states where performing homosexual marriage is legal as of 2009 has held steady at four: Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, and Vermont.
Religious beliefs and community ethics are sound foundations for the protections society afford real families and their offspring. One must therefore conclude that the larger interests of society take precedence over homosexuals who provide no benefit to the nation or future generations with their cohabiting liaisons. Theirs is an illicit “love” that will never have natural offspring, a union that cannot rear children in proper gender roles, or secures them against the breakup of the family.
References
Anonymous. “Gay Marriage Ban: Who Wins? Religious Conservatives. The Christian Century, 123 (2006) 14.
Gallagher, Maggie. “Marriage Matters: Why?” 2004. Web.
Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life, The. “Surveys Part 2: Gay Marriage.” 2009. Web. Public Law 104−199, 110 Stat. 2419, H.R. 3396.
Yang, Allan S. “The Polls-Trends: Attitudes Toward Homosexuality.” Public Opinion Quarterly. 61:33, (1997) 477-507.