Sunday, May 15, 2005

Marriage Amendment

Today I posted this letter to the editors of several local newspapers:
Ohioans made it clear in last November’s elections that they want to define marriage as the union between one man and one woman. That same Defense of Marriage Act has been passed in several other states since then. However, it is becoming obvious that a an amendment to the state constitution is not enough. Recently, in a federal court ruling out of Nebraska, a U. S. district court judge manipulated the Constitution to declare Nebraska’s marriage-protection amendment invalid.
Judge Joseph F. Bataillon said preventing gays from marrying violated their rights to "equal protection" under the U.S. Constitution, but nothing could be further from the truth. Those in favor of same-sex marriage have had and continue to have every right and opportunity to push for passage of their own pro-gay-marriage amendment
It's a nonsensical ruling clearly driven by a political agenda. Marriage law does not discriminate; marriage is open to any two individuals who meet certain criteria regarding age and blood relationship and who are of the opposite sex. Gay activists seek not to end discrimination, but rather to completely redefine — and thus undermine — the foundational institution of marriage.
All of this is evidence that preserving the traditional definition of marriage cannot be accomplished at the state level. Nothing short of defining marriage in the federal Constitution is sufficient to keep the Judeo-Christian definition of marriage from being redefined by leftist activists and judges.
Efforts to pass such an amendment stalled in the House and Senate last year, but the Nebraska travesty is just the impetus lawmakers need to get the job done this time around. Contact your congressman and senators today and urge them to support the Marriage Protection Amendment.

No comments: