This time a week ago the Supreme Court heard two cases which may have a profound impact on the state of marriage, freedom of speech, and religious freedom for decades to come. The two cases involve challenges to California's 2008 Proposition 8 in which a majority of that state's electors approved restricting marriage to between a man and woman and an estate tax case from New York challenging the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act passed by Congress and signed by President Clinton which also reaffirmed traditional marriage.
A lot has happened since then. Some polls indicate that a majority of respondents favor same sex marriage. The cry of "the culture is changing" is in the air. Ohio Republican Senator Rob Portman has recently declared his support for this concept because his son is homosexual. Indiana Democrat Senator Joe Donnelly, who proclaimed his support for traditional marriage during his successful 2012 campaign decided to flip flop on April 5, 2013. Numerous proponents of same sex marriage cite the enduring value of love and say it's a matter of civil rights and equality (the early 21st century constitutional golden idol) which should be extended to anyone. Such gibberish reminds me of the Apostle Paul's words in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 "For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from truth and turn aside to myths."
Paul's words are particularly resonant today as centuries of sound social policy, representing the wisdom of centuries of human experience from multiple cultures and religious perspectives, are under unparalleled assault from militant secularist forces. These forces representing a minority of the population seek to use the tactics of Nazi Germany, Communism, and militant Islam to impose their perversions on society. Allowing same sex marriage to occur will have grievous consequences for society and the freedoms of religion and speech which are core components of our constitutional fabric.
The Family Research Council recently published a superlative brochure "The Top Ten Harms of Same Sex "Marriage
which effectively demonstrates many of the public health and socioeconomic consequences of this expanded definition of "marriage."
1. Taxpayers, consumers, and businesses would be forced to subsidize homosexual relationships. This would expand Social Security survivors Benefits to individuals and "couples" in such relationships at a time when overstressed entitlement programs such as Social Security are not economically sustainable over the long-term. Employers who do not want to pay employee benefits to same sex partners would probably be forced to do so by court order.
2. Schools would teach that homosexual relationships are identical to heterosexual ones. This has happened in Brookline, MA in 2004 when lesbian teacher Deb Allen felt emboldened to incorporate "gay-friendly" content into her eighth grade sex education curriculum after that state's court legalized same sex marriages. Indoctrinating students and colleagues into accepting same sex marriages and allied relationships has been a big and, unfortunately, successful emphasis of same sex marriage proponents. In 2006 Missouri State University student Emily Brooker was ordered by her professor to advocate the Show-Me State Legislature for same sex marriage against her religious beliefs. Brooker filed suit and that university's social work department received a scathing rebuke from a professional accrediting agency. A student was threatened with expulsion by a Los Angeles Community College professor for expressing his support for traditional marriage. In 2009, Eastern Michigan University graduate counseling student Julea Ward was expelled from her program for refusing to affirm the homosexual lifestyle to a prospective client. Ward sued and eventually received a $75,000 settlement from her former university imposed by a federal court. University of Toledo diversity employee Crystal Dixon (the institution where I received a Masters Degree in History) was fired because she refused to accept the mythology that the homosexual rights movement was the same as the civil rights movement when she wrote a letter to the Toledo Free Press criticizing this comparison. Two homosexual students at George Washington University have called for Catholic priest Father Greg Shaffer to be removed from his position because of his pro-life views and support of traditional sexual morality.
3. Freedom of conscience and religious liberty would be threatened. According to the Alliance Defending Freedom, Christian firefighters in San Diego were forced to participate in a pro-homosexual parade. The city of Louisville, KY is investigating printer Blaine Adamson for not printing pro-homosexual tshirts. Montana state officials harassed Canyon Ferry Road Baptist Church for publicly supporting traditional marriage. A Christian photographer in New Mexico received death threats and assessed thousands of dollars in fines for declining to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony. Jewish University Yeshiva University was forced to allow same-sex "domestic partners" in married student housing. The Christian Legal Society at the University of California Hastings Law School was denied official recognition by their university because opposing homosexual conduct is one of their core principles.
Recently passed Colorado legislation legalizing same sex marriage DOES NOT include an exemption for religious institutions.
4. Fewer people would marry. A 2005 report demonstrated that only 12% of same sex couples in the Netherlands had married with an additional 10% being in registered partnerships. Only 18% of opposite sex cohabiting Dutch have rejected marriage. Not marrying sets a detrimental example to couples and increases the acceptability of cohabitation. A California fertility doctor was sued for refusing to artificially inseminate a lesbian woman. The online dating service Eharmony succumbed to legal pressure and agreed to provide services for same-sex couples.
5. Fewer people would remain monogamous and sexually faithful. According to the Family Research Council, studies of same sex relationships over many decades show that sex with multiple partners is often tolerated and expected even when one has a long-term partner. A Dutch study of such relationships showed that men in partnered relationships had an average of eight sexual partners annually outside the primary relationship while those without a "permanent partner" averaged 22 sexual partners per year.
6. Fewer people would remain married for a lifetime. A Wright State University study referenced by the Family Research Council found "it is safe to conclude that gay and lesbian couples dissolve their relationships more frequently than heterosexual couples, especially heterosexual couples with children." An aforementioned Dutch study found that the average male homosexual partnership lasted only 1.5 years while over 50% of heterosexual marriages last fifteen years or longer.
7. Fewer children would be raised by a married mother and father. This would effectively give government approval for creating permanently motherless and fatherless households for children. Children raised by married parents lower rates of social problems including premarital childbearing, illicit drug use, arrest, health, and health, emotional, or behavioral problems.
8. More children would grow up fatherless. Fathers contribute to parenting in ways mothers do not. Youth incarceration rates are higher for male adolescents without fathers. Early sexual activity and pregnancy are more likely for daughters without a father. Fatherless males are more likely to acquire guns which should influence our current political and societal debate on gun control.
9. Birth rates would fall. Same sex couples are biologically incapable of procreating and must turn to artificial insemination. In 2007, four of the five states allowing same sex marriage ranked in the bottom eighth of fifty states in birth and fertility rates. Six of ten countries with same sex marriage are in the bottom quarter of birth and fertility rates among 223 countries and territories internationally. Legalizing same sex marriage reinforces a declining emphasis on procreation as a key purpose of marriage.
10. Demands for legalizing polygamy would grow. A 2004 San Francisco Chronicle story on the polyamory movement quoted Unitarian Universalists for Polyamory Awareness "President" Jasmine Walston as saying her movement was where the gay rights movement was 30 years ago. A December 26, 2003 Washington Blade story quoted Art Spitzer of the American Civil Liberties Union praising the Supreme Court's Lawrence v. Texas ruling overturning state antisodomy laws by saying this decision would give lawyers a foothold to argue a case on behalf of polyamorous relationships. Convicted Utah bigamists Tom Green and Rodney Holm have appealed to have their convictions overturned citing the Lawrence case as precedent. Another attorney has filed suit challenging the refusal of the Salt Lake County Utah clerk to take a second wife.
Those of us concerned about the future of marriage and society can use these social science cases and overwhelming public health evidence to demonstrate that changing the definition of marriage to include same sex couples will have tragic economic, public health, and social consequences for our country. We must stand firm against cries of hatred and bigotry from proponents of these behaviors.
We have been to convinced that others share our values and have allowed the proponents of perversion to influence our educational system, entertainment media, courts, laws, and business practices to favor their lifestyles. We need to start fighting back by doing a better job of educating our children, friends, family, neighbors, and society at large about the dangerous consequences to our political and religious freedoms and to our country at large if the Supreme Court issues landmark rulings in these cases of intellectual folly and moral depravity rivaling Dred Scott, Roe v. Wade, and Lawrence v. Texas. We need to begin fighting to reclaim our culture from those seeking to inject their consciously chosen folly to permeate all levels of society. Proponents of same sex marriage do not seek equality they seek absolute dominance and total societal submission to their depravity.