Supreme Court considers issues of gay marriage, rule of law
Despite laws protecting marriage, the Supreme Court could set dangerous precedent.
The Supreme Court is hearing arguments today regarding the sanctity of marriage and petitions on behalf of the homosexual equivalency movement. Individuals choosing to practice a homosexual lifestyle are seeking the same legal recognition as married couples. The Court is hearing two cases related to the subject. Their decision could either affirm marriage or undermine it entirely.
Natural Law is the basis for marriage, but the Supreme Court may break it as a legal construct in the United States.
The second question asks if the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which says the federal government recognizes only marriages between men and women, is somehow an overreach of federal power.
Both laws were passed with significant majorities and have enjoyed large popular support. However, effective lobbying by the homosexual equivalency movement has managed to reframe the debate sufficiently to force the issue back into the courts. The homosexual equivalency movement seeks to not only ascribe some "moral" equivalency between homosexual acts and the marital embrace between a man and woman - but now further insists that the State declare homosexual and lesbian partnerships to be the legal equivalent of true marriage.
The California Prop 8 case, also known as Perry v. Hollingsworth, is considered by some Court observers to be the most important case of the two. If the Court somehow reaches the conclusion that individuals choosing to live a non-normative, homosexual lifestyle can also gain legal recognition as a married couple, then marriage loses meaning as a gold standard for relationships. The definition of marriage immediately becomes pliable and flexible, bound only to shifting opinion.
The purpose of marriage has always been to recognizethe lifelong union between heterosexual couples who hope to bear and rear children and thus form a family. Marriage, and the family founded upon it, is the first cell of society. Although children may not always result from these marital unions, it remains possible. Homosexual and lesbian couples cannot bear children. Although, with the use of surrogates and technology, even that distinction is now being attacked. Children will soon be treated as a commodity to be obtained.
Although laws in the United States allow same-sex individuals to freely cohabitate and choose a lifestyle that suits their sexual preference, the homosexual equivalency movement is demanding equal recognition of homosexual and lesbian partnerships. By that they mean changing the very definition of marriage and restructuring society along with it. This is in spite of the Natural Law which is recognized across cultures and has provided the very foundation of civilization.
The US Supreme Court may take severalapproaches on the matter, but those defending marriage in accordance with Natural Law and reason are concerned that Justice Anthony Kennedy may be the swing vote in this matter and cast a decision that undermines marriage as between one man and one woman.
These fears stem from his earlier decisions that decriminalized certain deviant sexual behaviors.
Most states, 41 to be exact, have laws which recognize the sanctity of traditional marriage and prohibit the dilution of the standard. This broad popularity for protecting marriage may sway the Justices to render a narrow verdict that minimizes the damage to marriage. In such a case, the Justices may carefully word their ruling to grant the homosexual equivalency movement their demands in California while allowing other states to keep their laws.
Less likely is that the court will rule against four-fifths of all states and permit the destruction of their laws, thus placating the demands of homosexual radicals. However, such a ruling is possible.
Perhaps least likely, analysts say, is that the court will protect marriage altogether as what it is, the union between one man and one woman, intended for life and open to children. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court has demonstrated its propensity to rule consistent with shifting opinion on landmark cases as has been noted at times in United States history. Still, if the court supports marriage and respects the will of the people who have passed perfectly reasonable laws to protect marriage, it will be seen as a great victory for faith, reason, and the rule of law.
© 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.
Rate This Article
Leave a Comment
More Politics & Policy News
- Russia seeks access to new facilities for navy: Is a new Cold War ahead?
- Bill that would allow surprise inspections at abortion clinics close to approval in Arizona
- UN: Almost 10,000 incidents of school violence from 2009-2013
- Syria, Venezuela, North Korea and Uganda called out by U.S. State Department for human rights abuses
- Citing 'negative consequences,' Arizona Governor vetoes anti-gay bill
- 'Shared responsibility payment' in Obamacare tax hides veiled threat
- California Senator faces 400 years in prison on corruption charges
- Leaked document shows NSA spied on trade talks, U.S. lawyers
- First medical doctor in Texas suspended under new abortion law
- 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?