The gay marriage issue evokes extreme passion on both sides andis one topic that will only become more public and divisive as theelection draws closer.
The Massachusetts Supreme Court said marriage was something thatevolved and could be changed.
I must disagree.
Marriage is something that is deeply rooted in the history andtradition of society. It is an institution — one that isunder attack and must be defended.
I believe in a right and wrong, and contrary to the liberal,free thinking belief, not everything can be left for choice.
The same-sex marriage debate is an attack on the objective moralorder of society — the belief that in society there is aplace for order and structure.
In this structure, sexuality is intended for pleasure between aman and a woman and used for procreation.
This intent is the foundation for countless traditions andcultures; it is the basis for the current marriage laws in 49 ofthe 50 states (I exclude Massachusetts); and it is in line withmultiple religions.
This structure is being tested though by homosexuals.
By bringing this issue to the forefront, homosexuals areessentially saying that in this world, there is no place forstructure or civil order. The world is changeable, laws arechangeable, the family structure does not matter and sexuality hasno purpose other than to please your own selfish desires.
If same-sex marriage wins out, then what’s to say otherlong-standing tenants of our society won’t be up fordebate?
Many today are comparing the fight for marriage and the fight byblacks for civil rights. However, gay marriage is not a fight forindividual freedom, and every African-American should be disgustedat their attempt to make that comparison.
Can they really draw the comparison? The civil rights movementwas the push to erase the unfair, ill-conceived differences ofblacks by whites.
Blacks fought to change the notion that they were differenthuman beings.
A marriage between a man and woman is so firmly grounded inprocreation.
Yet the same-sex marriage issue separates itself from the civilrights movement in that there are true, significant differencesbetween the homosexual and heterosexual relationship.
Therefore, the comparison cannot be drawn.
Looking forward to the presidential election, some may say thatPresident Bush is trying to politicize the issue.
I, however, think he tried to avoid it for a long time.
So why is he being vilified for his stance when his opponent,John Kerry, claims he too doesn’t want gay marriage?
Why isn’t Kerry called insensitive and bigoted?
Probably because his supporters know he doesn’t mean whathe says.
If you are like me and believe in the sanctity of marriage, thenyou need to do something. Don’t be silent. Stand up and fightfor what is right.
Unfortunately, our opponents have become skillful at abusing thejudiciary and have found a friend in activist judges.
However, even the most liberal judge will bow to the power oforganized public opinion. So get organized, be heard, and supportthe rule of law.
Respected author and columnist, Charles Colson said,”Accepting same-sex relationships as the moral and legalequivalent of marriage will transform the very definition ofmarriage — with far reaching repercussions.”
I agree.
Swede Hanson is a MBA student at the Cox School of Businessand host of the campus political talk show “Truth BeTold!” on KPNI – SMU Radio. He may be reached [email protected].
