Marriage

---

Marriage is an institution of such importance that it is uniquely protected under our laws and within American culture. Marriage as an institution has existed for thousands of years and no civilization can survive without it. Those societies that have allowed marriage to become degraded, irrelevant or have succumbed to the lure of disregarding the union of a man and a woman have quietly faded into history.

Marriage by its inherent definition is the union of the two sexes, not just the union of two people. When this understanding is lost, marriage becomes meaningless. To keep the integrity of marriage, the traditional understanding of the institution must be preserved.

The social acceptance of homosexual marriage is no minor adjustment or a slight change that just seeks to extend benefits to a class of individuals. In truth, it is a substantive change in the essence of the institution. Same-sex marriage does not expand marriage, it alters its core meaning and thus ends marriage as we now know it by remaking the institution into something different and cold: a mere contract between any two individuals.

In our system of law, the powers of government are divided between the federal and state governments. The framers rightly left marriage policy, as so many other things, with the states and in turn the states have spoken for the vast majority of Americans and time and again supported traditional marriage.

Unfortunately, the debate to protect traditional marriage has moved beyond the legislature where it rightly should be, and shifted to courts throughout the nation. This is where a bunch of judges who are out to push a cultural revolution that disregards the values of our people have begun ignoring our longest held beliefs concerning traditional marriage.

Put simply, marriage is not simply being challenged by a number of state and federal court decisions, it is being attacked by those that seek to overthrow the customs, laws, and social norms of human experience. Beginning with a trial court judge in Hawaii, followed by a superior court judge in Alaska, then by the Vermont Supreme Court and most recently, a 4-3 decision of the Massachusetts Supreme Court, extremists have systematically declared war on traditional marriage.

These decisions seek to remake the entire social structure of our nation, while the unelected judges who make them intentionally act contrary to the law. In the face of such a concerted and spiteful legal and political effort to deconstruct and undo one of the most basic institutions of our society, those of us who have been elected to represent the will of the people have a moral and Constitutional duty to protect marriage, beat back the tide of this liberal judicial coup, and uphold the rule of law and the definition of marriage.

Under normal circumstances, I would think that the federal laws protecting marriage might be enough. But with the gleeful thrust that activist judges and left wing local officials disregard clear laws and legislative intent because it fails to fit their perception of rationality or advance their left-wing agenda, I realize these are times that call for extraordinary measures. Since it is clear to me that Constitutional government is threatened when judges alter the definition of social institutions and reinterpret the laws that elected representatives have constructed, we must fight them on the constitutional level.

This is a defining moment for our nation, a crossroads. Americans are a greatly tolerant and very reasonable people who do not seek to harm anyone. Homosexuals deserve to live without harassment and America did not choose this debate or force this issue upon the nation.

But now that the issue has been forced upon us by those that seek to usurp the government at the courthouse because they can’t get their agenda passed at the ballot box, we must act in defense of our deepest convictions in protection of the foundational structure of civilization.

Amending the Constitution is a long and trying process, as it should be, and it certainly should not be taken lightly. However, just because something is difficult doesn’t mean we should stand down, and it is now the time for the sake of constitutional government and the protection of marriage in our society to amend the U.S. Constitution to preserve marriage as the legal union between one man and one woman.

A constitutional amendment that defines marriage as the unique merging of the two sexes will protect the states’ ability to regulate marriage in accord with the principles of federalism. To keep the integrity of marriage, the traditional understanding of the institution must be preserved.