Threats to Marriage

 

The world asks, “What is the big deal with legalizing same-sex marriage?” Attorney, Cathy Ruse brought up some meaningful arguments for traditional and historical marriage, between a man and a woman. First off, she argues that no one and no law can change a person’s belief that marriage is between a man and a woman. The world’s argument says mothers and fathers are dispensable. She defends her motherhood, saying that, “No man can be a mother”. Elites and academia laugh at the idea that children need a mother and a father and if you don’t agree with them you are called a bigot. An individual can take a stand within their own circle of influence by defending the truth, that no man can do this job of being a mother (or a father, if you are male). She declares, “I am not dispensable” and vice versa for a father.

Elder Nelson tells us it will not be easy in the current world, to take a stand for traditional marriage and that is true. He also asked, "Or will you be ashamed of the gospel? Will you be ashamed of your Lord and His plan?5 Will you yield to voices of those who would have you join them on the popular side of contemporary history?" My children get paid to perform in theater and in traveling groups around the world, with BYU and with community groups. Many of their friends are same-sex couples. So, we have worked very hard to show love to these great individuals, without changing our stance on traditional marriage. That is sometimes very difficult, but we have found many blessings that have come through the process of showing love and commitment to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Justice Kennedy delivered this opinion by the court concerning marriage:

“The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity. The petitioners in these cases seek to find that liberty by marrying someone of the same sex and having their marriages deemed lawful on the same terms and conditions as marriages between persons of the opposite sex…This Court granted review, limited to two questions…The first…is whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to license a marriage between two people of the same sex. The second…is whether the Fourteenth Amendment requires a State to recognize a same-sex marriage licensed and performed in a State which does grant that right.” The judges go on to talk about how the petitioners value marriage and do not wish to weaken it but strengthen it and that marriage is “dynamic”. They continue to say, “Under the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, no State shall ‘deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law’.”

The opinion states the conclusion that “same-sex couples may exercise the right to marry”. It lists four principles that support their opinion.

1. The right to personal choice regarding marriage is inherent in the concept of individual
2. The right to marry is fundamental because it supports a two-person union unlike any other in its importance to the committed individuals.
3. It safeguards children and families and thus draws meaning from related rights of childrearing, procreation, and education.
4. Marriage is a keystone of our social order.

My favorite legal quote from Obergefell v. Hodges, was by Judge Scalia in his dissenting message:

“So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact— and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.”

Attorney Ruse goes on to say that there is a simple legal question that should solve this argument. Why is government involved with marriage in the first place? She says it’s because of children. What are we going to do with the children? We encourage parents through law, to raise their children. “Love has never been the governments business…until now…who you love is now the government’s business”, say Ruse. Change in marriage law, was made to sanction marriage that was not historically sanctioned.

Satan knows that this argument can divide people; each believing they are being the most Christlike. One side believes they are being kept from a God given right, by hateful people and the other believes they are being forced to change their beliefs, “Bake my cake or lose your house”. Satan wins when we forget to look to God for His word and to act accordingly.