To purchase the entire DVD set of the Summit Lecture Series, visit summit.org.
Virtually Every social problem we have can be traced back to a problem in a family.
Also, every child deserves a mother and a father – not to say that every child gets one, but every child does deserve one.
Or, as liberal author David Blankenhorn wrote in his book “The Future of Marriage”:
“Across history and cultures… marriage’s single most fundamental idea is that every child needs a mother and a father. Changing marriage to accommodate same-sex couples would nullify this principle in culture and in law… One can believe in same-sex marriage. One can believe that every child deserves a mother and a father. One cannot believe both.”
Now, the law is a great teacher. Consider seatbelt laws. When I was a boy, there were no seatbelt laws and all us kids bounced around the back of my parent’s station wagon. And no one thought that my parents were terrible parents. But today, if someone were to see my family bouncing along the highway, they’d have my parents cited and us kids would be taken into CPS custody. My parents would be labeled as moral monsters!
Many people think that whatever is legal is moral and whatever is illegal is immoral. There’s often a synergistic affect at work here. Sometimes culture helps change the law; while other times the law helps change the culture. But, either way, the law is important. It teaches people right from wrong.
We see this in regards to abortion. In 1973, all 50 states had some sort of law against abortion. Then, in one day, seven unelected Justices overturned the will of the people in a snap. They said the right to a woman’s privacy is more important than the right of a child’s life. Today, the American populace is about evenly split on the issue. The law changed, and decades later the attitudes of the people have changed. Some people say that the law can’t change hearts, but it has been proven to change attitudes, even about what is right and wrong.
And this is what we are being told in regards to same-sex marriage.
Legal decisions regarding same-sex marriage have equivocated marriage between a man and a woman with marriage between same-sex couples. Which means that marriage doesn’t have anything to do with children. It has everything to do with coupling.
But, if there isn’t an institution for children called marriage, what institution is there for children?
Now, I understand that some marriages don’t have children. There are exceptions to every rule. But there are no exceptions to the rules of procreation. So, you can’t say that the relationships are equal.
Stanley Kurz, who wrote for The Weekly Standard said:
“Scandinavian gay marriage has driven home the message that marriage itself is outdated and that virtually any family form, including out-of-wedlock parenthood, is acceptable.”
In some areas of Norway, they experience an out-of-wedlock birthrate of 70%. People there still have kids, but they don’t get married – which is a disaster for everyone. It’s a disaster for the kids because those parents break up at a much higher rate than married couples with children. It’s a disaster for society because once the family unit breaks down then the government has to bloat itself to try and do the things that the family should have been doing in the first place.
You cannot bifurcate the moral and the social issues.
So, this is the goal of many same-sex advocates:
“Homosexual activists must fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution. The most subversive action lesbian and gay men can undertake… is to transform the notion of ‘family’ entirely.
Our gay leaders must acknowledge that gay marriage is just as radical and transformative as the religious right contends it is. ”
– Michealangelo Signorile
Michealangelo Signorile is a radio host on Serius/XM’s PROGRESS chanel 127. He’s extremely influential and nailed the agenda.
As did Paula Ettelbrick, when she said:
“Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so… Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex and sexuality, and in the process transforming the very fabric of society.”
This is not “live and let live”. You are naïve if you believe that changing our marriage laws will not have any negative effects.
Consider Massachusetts, which was the first state to change its laws regarding same-sex marriage in 2004. The impact of their change in marriage laws has gone far beyond allowing people of the same gender to exchange wedding vows and receive insurance and hospital visitation rights. In Massachusetts, parents now have no right to know or opt out when homosexuality is being taught in schools (K-12). In fact, David Parker, a parent of a six-year-old was arrested in 2005 for questioning his second grader’s curriculum. He put it this way:
“Because of the same-sex marriage law people are treating this as a mandate to teach the youngest of children.”
One school administrator was quite blunt in regards to the widespread, indoctrinating ripples of Massachusetts’s marriage law:
“The goal is to reach kids before they absorb their parents’ values. By middle school, it’s too late.”
Another impact of same-sex marriage law in Massachusetts is that taxpayer money now goes to advocacy groups to promote homosexuality in schools (the only groups to get an increase in 2011 were gay activists). All other programs were on a tight budget, filled with cuts… with the exception of gay rights groups. Also, businesses must now give benefits to same-sex couples. The conscious clauses and moral objections that have been allowed people of faith since the founding of our country are no longer in play.