As I was browsing the web tonight, staying abreast of the marriage and family issues that are plaguing our country I came across this great post/memo from The Heritage Foundation.
Written by Thomas M. Messner, and Jennifer A. Marshall of the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Religion and Civil Society at The Heritage Foundation, they attempt to set President-elect Obama straight, or rather they call him out, on his support and then retraction of support for marriage as defined only between a man and a woman. They make some great points and cite tons of references. I am always impressed by citations and footnotes!!! Love it!! They know their stuff! Read their entire post here, and then if you feel so inclined, write a little memo of your own to Obama. Remember ladies and gentlemen, he works for us, not the other way around. In fact all government workers work for us, the American public!
We agree with you that marriage should be defined as a relationship between a man and a woman.
Societies through the ages have considered marriage to be a relationship between a man and a woman that forms the cornerstone of families and the ideal place for having and raising children. Societies have a strong interest in marriage because “procreation [is] fundamental to the very existence and survival of the [human] race.” Societies also have a strong interest in marriage because, as you have suggested, having both a mother and a father is important when it comes to raising children. For these reasons, it is fitting and proper to define marriage as a relationship between one man and one woman and to resist any attempt by courts to remove this issue from democratic deliberation.
In addition, redefining marriage to include homosexual unions poses serious threats to the religious liberties of people who continue to believe, as you do, that marriage is a relationship between a man and a woman. This understanding of marriage is an important religious belief for many Americans, but the freedom to express this belief will come under growing pressure as courts, public officials, and private institutions come to regard the traditional understanding of marriage as a form of irrational prejudice that should be purged from public life. Defending the legal definition of marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman, in addition to serving the fundamental public interests set forth above, would also check these threats to religious liberty and help to ensure that believers are not forced “to leave their religion at the door before entering into the public square.”
I love the points they make about homosexual unions posing serious threats to our religious liberties, because it’s true. However, gay rights activists try to convince us otherwise. The memo goes on to request that Obama adopt policies which will protect the traditional definition of marriage in this country. We don’t need a president who goes back on his word and blows around in the wind to see which statement will be most popular. We need a man of moral conviction to run this country, hopefully we will get one in 4 years, until then let’s hold him accountable.
Have a great weekend everyone! Thanks for reading!