Texas Federal Judge Garcia Joins Effort to Destroy Marriage: Time to March on Washington
Like the alchemists of old who purported to change profane metals into gold, these judges profess to be able to make something that can never be a marriage to become one, by way of judicial edicts. They have succumbed to the mistaken notion that their judicial office gives them the ability to change the structure of reality.
Another Federal Judge, U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio, Texas, has decided that he is a legal alchemist, able to change the nature of marriage by the stroke of a Judicial pen. In his opinion styled Cleopatra De Leon et al, v Rick Perry et al, he joined a growing number of Judicial Oligarchs who disregard the Natural Moral Law and the clear will of the people concerning the nature and ends of marriage.They are now issuing judicial decrees, pretending to be well reasoned opinions. They are presenting themselves as concerned for human rights when, they have simply determined that, based on their own authority; marriage is no longer between a man and a woman. They use a lot of sophistry and cite a lot of alleged legal precedent, in an effort to make themselves out to be liberators who are expanding marriage, when in fact they are undermining it, along with the common good of society.
In his opinion he asserted, "Today's court decision is not made in defiance of the great people of Texas or the Texas Legislature, but in compliance with the U.S. Constitution and Supreme Court precedent". That is a self serving defense of what is, in fact, an indefensible and inexplicable usurping of State and Federal authority. In 2005 State Proposition 2 passed by a large majority, 76% of the Voters of Texas. It clarified, in the face of efforts to redefine the institution of marriage, what marriage is by its very nature.
Its wording is simple and unmistakable. It is the express will of the people of Texas, "Marriage in this State shall consist only of the union of one man and one woman." However, Judicial Oligarchs have decided they are not bound by any law, whether it is the Natural Law or the positive law, properly enacted by the people. They have determined that they are not obligated to follow the express will of the people. They have decided that the Law is what they say it is.
So, they are now issuing judicial decrees, pretending to be well reasoned opinions. They are presenting themselves as concerned for human rights when, they have simply determined that, based on their own authority; marriage is no longer between a man and a woman. They use a lot of sophistry and cite a lot of alleged legal precedent, in an effort to make themselves out to be liberators who are expanding marriage, when in fact they are undermining it, along with the common good of society.
Like the alchemists of old who purported to change profane metals into gold, these judges profess to be able to make something what it can never be. They utter indecipherable words by which they command a relationship which is incapable of marriage to become one, by way of their judicial edicts. They have succumbed to the mistaken notion that their judicial office gives them the ability to change the structure of reality. They are also now becoming icons for a New Cultural Revolution which is being advanced by the Homosexual Equivalency movement.
Members of the homosexual equivalency movement have long insisted that there is a moral equivalency between homosexual relationships and marriage. However, they now go further. They demand that a legal equivalency be given to homosexual relationships and marriage in the civil law. They want the Police Power of the State to enforce it. They reject the truth concerning the nature of marriage, show a disregard for the rights of children and care little about the true common good of society.
Authentic marriage, and the family and society founded upon it, are the foundation of a free, just and healthy society. To insist that marriage is between one man and one woman is not simply a religious position; it is an objective truth. It is affirmed by the Natural law which can be known by all men and women through the exercise of reason. It is also accepted across cultures.
The talking points of a propaganda press come right out of the Homosexual Equivalency Activists playbook. Groups such as the Human Rights Campaign and the Lambda Legal Defense Fund have long tried to force a comparison between the decisions issued by Judges like Garcia and Judge Arenda Wright Allen, who issued a similar ruling on Valentine's Day in Virginia, with the Supreme Court opinion in the 1967 Supreme Court Case of Loving v. Virginia. The Loving opinion properly struck down as unconstitutional the Virginia law prohibiting marriage between a black man and white woman or black woman and white man. There is no comparison.
The Lovings - whose marriage became the basis of that US Supreme Court opinion - were a man and a woman. As such they were capable of achieving the ends of marriage and had entered into a true marriage. An unjust law declared their proper and loving marital union to be illegal - because they had differing skin pigmentation! It was properly struck down as an egregious violation of the Equal Protection Clause.
However, the strained effort to draw an analogy between race and how one engages in non-marital sexual acts with members of the same sex is legally flawed and socially irresponsible. Opposition to giving homosexual partnerships the legal equivalent of marriage has nothing to do with discrimination. Not all relationships can form the basis for a marriage. Not all "love" is equal, in spite of the slogans of the homosexual equivalency movement.
Like the Texas situation, the Virginia Constitution was amended by the voters in 2006 to clarify what was always accepted as revealed by the Natural Law, that marriage is a union solely between one man and one woman, open to children, and formative of family, which is the first vital cell of society. Sadly, if one examines the main stream media reports, you would think that the unrelenting effort to undermine marriage is really about homosexuals, lesbians, transgendered people being subjected to discrimination. It is not.
The Attorney General of my own State of Virginia, Mark Herring, announced that he had a change of mind concerning his obligation to defend marriage after being elected. I was in the Courtroom on the day when he should have been present to defend marriage and fulfill his office. Through his Solicitor General he figuratively pulled a chair up to the table of the lawyers seeking to redefine marriage. It no longer mattered to this public servant that he promised the voters to defend marriage and the Constitution of our State.
As a Constitutional lawyer and policy activist, I know the strategy undertaken by the opponents of marriage through verbal, social and legal engineering. As a patriotic American, husband, father, and grandfather, I also know what I must now do. What is needed is a massive Marriage Defense Movement in the United States of America. Such a movement is already global and we are joining ranks with them for the true common good. I will be announcing a specific effort to gather an ecumenical movement together and join the March for Marriage already planned for June 19, 2014 in Washington, DC.
Last January, the China Post reported that over 200,000 people marched in front of Taiwan's Presidential Office. They stood for the irrefutable truth that marriage is between one man and one woman. "God created human beings as male and female. Only the union of a man and a woman can create the next generation, and the ability to create offspring is an important function of a family," said one of the participants, 40-year-old Ann Huang, who joined the rally with her friends.
In the network which sponsored the March to Defend Marriage was a group calling itself the Coalition for the Happiness of Our Next Generation. Yu Yen-hung, one of the founders of the organization, who told the China Post, "We worry that this alternative family formation idea will confuse children's concepts on education and sexual identity. Therefore, we decided to stand up and fight against this bill that will affect the next generation."
Of course, that worry is correct. Children have a right to a mother and a father. Intact, true marriages, between one man and one woman, are the foundation of a family. Family is the first cell of society. Sadly, if one examines the main stream media reports, you would think that this ongoing effort to undermine marriage as what it is, between one man and one woman, intended for life, open to children and formative of family, is about homosexuals, lesbians, transgendered people and other sexual revolutionaries and provocateurs being subjected to discrimination.
Massive crowds of people, from every segment of society, are now gathering around the world to defend the truth about marriage. On Sunday, March 24, 2013, hundreds of thousands of French citizens marched along the Champs-Elysees Avenue united in the same noble cause. They defended marriage and the family and society founded upon it against those who oppose marriage and seek to restructure civil society by legislative or judicial fiat. They faced tear gas and clubs from the riot police representing the French Socialist regime. They were courageous and unwilling to back down. They sang La Marseillaise, the French National Anthem, and called for the resignation of the President.
They gathered again in February in France, led by an association called La Manif Pour Tous (Protest for Everyone). There were similar marches in Brussels, Bucharest, Madrid, Warsaw and Rome. The propagandized press reported that these people were "against gay marriage" and "right wing". The fact is they are for marriage, as between one man and one woman and the basis of family. They also came from across the political spectrum. The press woefully minimized their numbers. The crowds are massive, they are growing, and the movement is just in its infancy.
Many media reports simply refused to report the truth because it did not support their own social and politically charged agenda. The marchers respect all men and women, including those who self identify as homosexual. They simply reject the notion of 'gay marriage', a phrase which is an oxymoron. The propaganda press uses Orwellian newspeak to fuel caricatures against those who defend true marriage. They do not report the news - they promote a Cultural Revolution which opposes marriage while purporting to expand its definition.
Like propagandists of the past, they attempt to frame public perception by calling those who defend marriage as being against what they call 'marriage equality'. However, homosexual and lesbian partnerships are incapable of achieving the ends of marriage. The marchers in China, in France and all over the world are the proponents, the defenders, of true liberation. They are advocates for a society of human flourishing and freedom. They defend real marriage and thereby defend the rights of children to a mother and father. They promote the common good.
The marchers are a part of a global Marriage Defense Movement. This new counter-cultural movement is about to reshape history. It crosses racial, ethnic, socio-economic, religious, philosophical and political lines. The members of this Marriage Defense movement seek to defend and to liberate marriage from the propagandists and Cultural Revolutionaries who oppose it and are working undermine it. They seek to defend marriage.
Marriage 'is what it is', to use a popular expression. The effort to redefine the word and then use the mechanisms of the State to entirely restructure this institution inscribed in the Natural Law - and replace it - is what is at stake here. Those who advocate giving moral and legal equivalency to homosexual and lesbian relationships are the people who oppose marriage. Their intention is to entirely reorder civil society. They use the phrase 'marriage equality' in an Orwellian act of verbal engineering.
They want to use the police power of the State against those who defend marriage. They seek to make what can never be a marriage - a homosexual or lesbian partnership - to be a marriage, by pronouncement of a Court or a legislature. Such partnerships can never achieve the ends of marriage. They accuse those who defend a authentic marriage of somehow being against marriage because we will not redefine the word to include homosexual or lesbian partnerships.
This is a propaganda ploy and a tactic aimed at nothing less than a Cultural Revolution. I know that some of my readers do not like it when I use the term Cultural Revolution. They object because the term was identified with the reassertion of Maoism in China. That movement, which turned violent, caused extraordinary social turmoil. That is PRECISELY why the analogy is apropos.
Those who marched in Paris and Taiwan and across Europe are now being joined in solidarity by marchers around the world. A counter-cultural movement to defend marriage is growing. It is spreading around the globe. It rejects the imposition of the new order which rejects the truth about marriage and the family and society founded upon it. It is dedicated - and will not back down.
To limit marriage to heterosexual couples is not discriminatory. Homosexual couples cannot bring into existence what marriage intends by its very definition. To confer by governmental fiat the benefits that have been conferred in the past only to stable married couples and families to homosexual and lesbian paramours is bad public policy.
To state this bluntly is not to be 'anti-gay'; it is simply to defend marriage and the common good. This is a noble cause. Those who promote and defend marriage are not bigots, they are the true liberators! Though the Marriage Defense Marchers represent every segment of society, and reflect a wide range of ages, ethnic identities and political persuasions, they were collectively labeled as conservatives in much of the international press.
The fact that the marchers were dismissed in propaganda press reports as bigoted. Ironically, their numbers encompassed people from every walk of life, race, social and economic class and political persuasion. They are all simply unwilling to bend the knee to the new cultural revolutionaries. Get ready; you and I are soon to face the same treatment as they did because we stand for marriage.
We are involved in a contest over what constitutes a truly human and just social order. We insist that marriage between one man and one woman, intended for life, and the family founded upon it, has been inscribed by the Divine Architect into the order of the universe. That is because they have. Truth does not change, people and cultures do; sometimes for good and sometimes for evil.
Marriage is the first society into which children are meant to be born, learn to be fully human, grow in virtue, flourish and take their role in families and communities. We must not be afraid to make the claim that children have a right to a mother and a father. They really do. Of course we care about the single parent family and the many broken homes which characterize this age. However, their existence does not change the normative nature of marriage as necessary for a stable and healthy society.
Intact marriages and families are the glue of a healthy and happy social order. We need to be a visible, palpable reflection of this truth about marriage and family in our own lives. To live a faithful marriage is now counter-cultural. Our convictions and claims concerning marriage are not outdated notions of a past era but provide the path to the future. Nor is our position defending marriage as between one man and one woman simply a religious position. We insist upon the existence of a Natural Moral Law which can be known by all men and women through the exercise of reason.
The Natural Moral Law is the ground upon which every great civilization has been built. It is the source for every great and authentic human and civil rights movement. The Natural Law gives us the moral norms we need to build societies and govern ourselves. It should inform our positive law or we will become lawless and devolve into anarchy.
There is a growing intolerance spreading which directly threatens our rights to free expression, association and political participation. This is reflected in a brazen effort to censor any speech which questions the cultural slide into the abyss of relativism. Efforts to prevent our vocal and public defense of the objective truth about marriage and the family are multiplying. However, they are not succeeding. The streets of Washington, DC need to be filled with hundreds of thousands of supporters of Marriage on June 19, 2014.
I write as a Catholic Christian. The position of the Catholic Church on the nature of marriage is crystal clear. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Catholic Church explained in 2003: The Church 's teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognized as such by all the major cultures of the world. Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It was established by the Creator with its own nature, essential properties and purpose."
No ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman, who by mutual personal gift, proper and exclusive to themselves, tend toward the communion of their persons. In this way, they mutually perfect each other, in order to cooperate with God in the procreation and upbringing of new human lives.
I am joined with Christians from across the confessional spectrum, faithful Jews, other people of faith and those of good will in this growing marriage defense movement. We are the new counter culture of this age. The opponents of marriage and family are the proponents of a system which seeks to impose their new order on the rest of us. We will not back down because our cause is just and true. History has demonstrated that we are on the right side, they are on the wrong side, and we will prevail.
Civil institutions do not create marriage. Neither can they create some new right to marry for those who are incapable of marriage. Government has long regulated marriage for the common good. The ban on polygamy and age requirements were enforced in order to ensure that there was a mature decision at the basis of the Marriage contract. Redefining the institution of marriage is improper and outside the authority of the State or Federal Government.
Heterosexual marriage, procreation, and the nurturing of children form the foundation for the family, and the family forms the foundation of civil society. What occurred in Paris and in Taiwan is a part of a Movement which is spreading throughout the world. It will stand up against those who seek to undermine marriage. There is an international movement being birthed and it is about to rock the world.
The Marriage Defense Movement is growing. We are the new and true counter culture of this age. We will prevail. History, truth and authentic social justice are on our side. The next year will show that this movement is the future. It serves the true common good. Stay tuned, pray, and get ready to fully participate on June 19, 2014.
© 2014 - Distributed by THE NEWS CONSORTIUM
Pope Francis Prayer Intentions for March 2014
Respect for Women: That all cultures may respect the rights and dignity of women.
Vocations: That many young people may accept the Lordís invitation to consecrate their lives to proclaiming the Gospel.
Keywords: marriage, gay marriage, La Manif Pour Tous, traditional marriage defense, March to Defend marriage, National organization for Marriage, La Manif, Judge Garcia, Texas, Federal Cout, Deacon Keith Fournier
Rate This Article
Leave a Comment
More U.S. News
- Fr. Paul Schenck: The New Eugenics, 'Better Babies' and the Dangers of Biotechnology
- Interview With Cardinal SeŠn Patrick O'Malley Gives Insights into the Heart of Pope Francis
- Deal W. Hudson: Why Social Conservatives Should Become Cultural Conservatives
- CORPORATE SPY: Engineering consultant accused of stealing secrets from DuPont for Chinese
- 24th season of Defending Life Premiered March 5th on EWTN
- Justina Pelletier: Massachusetts DCF Running for Cover Under Legal and Media Pressure
- Matt C. Abbott On a New Book, The Seven Big Myths About Marriage
- Deal Hudson on Culture and the Death of God
- 'Ag gag' bill passes in Idaho; filming at farms now prohibited
- Fr. Paul Schenck: Finding Living Faith on Catechetical Sunday
- The Movie Yellow: Incest as 'Normal' and Cassavates's Slides Into the World of Woes
- The Chicago School Teachers Strike Reveals the Need For School Choice
- The Sexual Barbarians and the Dissolution of Culture
- The Happy Priest Challenges Us to Ask: Who is Jesus to Me?
- Michael Coren on Canadian Public Schools: Teachers, leave those kids alone
- We Cannot Ignore Our Consciences: Cardinal Dolan On Religious Liberty
- In the Face of Danger, Successor of Peter Travels to Lebanon as a Messenger of Peace
- Reflections on the Dignity and Vocation of Women: Who or What?