By Ulysses S. Arn -
It has been interesting to hear the arguments being made in support of same sex marriage these last few days as the Supreme Court heard oral arguments concerning California's proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act(DOMA). There has been a social media campaign on this subject with supporters of redefining the word marriage changing their profile pictures to an equal sign or the words "marriage equality". Protest have taken place both at state capitols and outside the Supreme Court. The media, from CNN to the major network newscasts and pages of the dying newspapers like the New York Times, have trumpeted same sex marriage as the new civil rights movement. In all of the promotion of same sex marriage one thing has been constant, from the court room to the carbon footprint that is MSNBC, marriage is a right and it is unconstitutional, bigoted, and outright wrong to deny the right to marry to homosexual couples.
That thinking, that logic is extremely flawed. Marriage, whether for heterosexuals or homosexuals, isn't a right. Marriage is an institution that society, culture, and tradition have developed over the course of thousands of years to ensure 1) the continuation of the human race and 2) the healthy growth and development of that society/culture.
This notion that same sex or gay marriage is a right has cropped up because of the dumbing down of the population as a whole as to what rights actually are and where they come from. You can blame 60+ years of liberal indoctrination in the public and university education system, the liberally biased media, and a lack of attention and awareness on the part of the American people for that.
Rights, broadly defined, cannot be granted by a government or bestowed by an individual(even if they wear a black robe). Rights, are either inherently natural(natural right) or divinely granted they cannot come from any other source. Governments are not created to create new rights for people, as the Soviet Constitution did granting people rights to things like work, housing, vacations, etc. Governments are created to protect and promote the rights the people already had before government was ever created. Make no mistake about it the wish of the same sex marriage proponents is for the government, in this case the courts, to create out of whole cloth a right that simply doesn't exist, for anyone.
Now unlike certain Libertarians who believe government should have no role whatsoever in marriage, I believe government does have a part to play in the institution of marriage. The governments role in marriage is only to ensure that 1) marriages are consensual 2) comport to societal standards, customs, and norms 3) promote and benefit a healthy and prosperous society/culture. That is it.
The same sex marriage crowd, which sadly includes way to many people under the age of 30, doesn't want to hear any of that. They don't want to listen to the reasoning behind why their right to marry argument is fundamentally flawed. They don't want to hear about how their same arguments in favor of same sex marriage can and will be used by polygamist, bestiality orientated people, and pedophiles to further erode the meaning of the word marriage to encompass their deviant behavior. They don't want to hear the historical fact that marriage has been defined in the Western and Judeo-Christian world has always been defined as being a union between one man and one woman. They probably don't want to be reminded of the fact that this same sex or gay marriage movement isn't even 25 years old. Or that no major religion condones the practice. And they most certainly don't want to be reminded of the fact that nearly every time the subject comes to a vote of the people it is defeated. Some 30 states have either enacted laws or amended their state Constitutions to ensure that marriage in that state is defined as being between one man and one woman.
There is a train of thought among the supporters of same sex marriage that such outcomes and results are due to discrimination. How so? No state in this nation nor the federal government prohibits homosexuals from having a relationship with a partner of their choice, so long as age of consent laws are observed. In their legal arguments gay marriage proponents often talk about wanting their partner to have things like power of attorney, inheritance, medical decision making, etc. All of those things a gay or lesbian couple can obtain via wills and other legal documents and procedures just like heterosexual couples can. So there is no discrimination or denial of equal protection of the law. All that same sex couples can't do is call their relationship a marriage in nearly every state(those states that do allow same sex marriages have done so via Judicial fiat and activism).
That gets to the nub of the matter the same sex marriage crowd and their supporters in the political class and media don't like that they can't call their same sex relationship a marriage. So to pacify their discomfort at not being able to call their relationship a marriage they seek to have the courts(and liberal politicians of both parties) change the meaning of a word. I am sorry, but just like one person cannot create a right out of thin air, one also can't simply change the meaning of a word because they disagree with it or want it to mean something else.
Hopefully the majority opinion of the Supreme Court will reflect these truths and uphold California's proposition 8 as being a duly and lawfully passed Constitutional Amendment to the California Constitution and that DOMA is a Constitutional law which ensures and protects federalism and the 10th Amendment. If nothing else the court should at the least(or most) throw out both cases before it on standing and say nothing about the matter of marriage.
