Tuesday, November 18, 2003


"Judicial hocus-pocus" is what a character from the television series Law and Order said in reference to the aggressive practice of legislation by judges... an act we have just seen in Massachusetts. Per the Conservative Crust, here's an excerpt of the decision, "Marriage is a vital social institution. The exclusive commitment of two individuals to each other nurtures love and mutual support; it brings stability to our society. For those who choose to marry, and for their children, marriage provides an abundance of legal, financial, and social benefits. In return it imposes weighty legal, financial, and social obligations. The question before us is whether, consistent with the Massachusetts Constitution, the Commonwealth may deny the protections, benefits, and obligations conferred by civil marriage to two individuals of the same sex who wish to marry. We conclude that it may not. The Massachusetts Constitution affirms the dignity and equality of all individuals. It forbids the creation of second-class citizens. In reaching our conclusion we have given full deference to the arguments made by the Commonwealth. But it has failed to identify any constitutionally adequate reason for denying civil marriage to same-sex couples." (emphasis added) I defy anyone to produce a homosexual couple that is able to procreate. To define marriage as a "vital social institution" is to trivialize it. Marriage binds a society. Marriage builds the family. Marriage includes sex, but marriage is not about sex. Homosexuality is. Anyone who doubts that statement need only watch a Gay Pride parade... If a same-sex couple can marry, for the reasons stated by the judges... why not a same-sex threesome?, or two men and one woman?, or just one woman? (as has happened in the Netherlands - say no more). But these are questions that don't seem to be considered by the judges while they establish laws to allow the minority to dictate to the majority how they will live. David Mills, of Touchstone magazine, recently wrote an article titled, Choosing Love & Making Life: Sex, Love, Marriage & the Culture of Life. He touches on the issues of free sex, homosexuality, abortion, and divorce... and he does a fine job of painting the true reality of the vows of marriage. He closes with, "A priest I know told me about a very sick man and his wife he watched at a special Mass celebrated for couples who had been married a long time. He was sitting near the altar and looked out on the front row, where the sick and handicapped had been seated. The husband lay on a gurney, having suffered for years from a degenerative disease that left him able only to move his eyes. His wife stood by him, and when the time came for the wives to renew their vows, she stood and took his hand and looked into his eyes as she renewed her vows to him. And then it was the husbands’ turn, and she took his hand and looked into his eyes as she spoke the words for him, and renewed his vows to her. In this woman is the culture of death defeated. In her are life’s true fruits to be seen. She has paid for them in ways she did not expect when she married, but having paid, she can hold the hand of her husband and tell the world she loves him, and he loves her, though he cannot hold her hand nor speak a word."

No comments: