Article brought to you by: Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Supreme Court considers issues of gay marriage, rule of law

By Catholic Online (NEWS CONSORTIUM)
March 26th, 2013
Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

The Supreme Court is hearing arguments today regarding the sanctity of marriage and petitions on behalf of the homosexual equivalency movement. Individuals choosing to practice a homosexual lifestyle are seeking the same legal recognition as married couples. The Court is hearing two cases related to the subject. Their decision could either affirm marriage or undermine it entirely.

WASHINGTON, DC (Catholic Online) - Tuesday morning's oral arguments are considering two questions. The first is whether California's Proposition 8, which holds that marriage is between one man and one woman, unfairly discriminates against individuals who prefer to live in a non-normative, homosexual lifestyle.

The second question asks if the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act, which says the federal government recognizes only marriages between men and women, is somehow an overreach of federal power.

Both laws were passed with significant majorities and have enjoyed large popular support. However,  effective lobbying by the homosexual equivalency movement has managed to reframe the debate sufficiently to force the issue back into the courts. The homosexual equivalency movement seeks to not only ascribe some "moral" equivalency between homosexual acts and the marital embrace between a man and woman - but now further insists that the State declare homosexual and lesbian partnerships to be the legal equivalent of true marriage.

The California Prop 8 case, also known as Perry v. Hollingsworth, is considered by some Court observers to be the most important case of the two. If the Court somehow reaches the conclusion that individuals choosing to live a non-normative, homosexual lifestyle can also gain legal recognition as a married couple, then marriage loses meaning as a gold standard for relationships. The definition of marriage immediately becomes pliable and flexible, bound only to shifting opinion.

The purpose of marriage has always been to recognizethe  lifelong union between heterosexual couples who hope to bear and rear children and thus form a family. Marriage, and the family founded upon it, is the first cell of society. Although children may not always result from these marital unions, it remains possible. Homosexual and lesbian couples cannot bear children. Although, with the use of surrogates and technology, even that distinction is now being attacked. Children will soon be treated as a commodity to be obtained.

Although laws in the United States allow same-sex individuals to freely cohabitate and choose a lifestyle that suits their sexual preference, the homosexual equivalency movement is demanding equal recognition of homosexual and lesbian partnerships. By that they mean changing the very definition of marriage and restructuring society along with it. This is in spite of the Natural Law which is recognized across cultures and has provided the very foundation of civilization. 

The US Supreme Court may take severalapproaches on the matter, but those defending marriage in accordance with Natural Law and reason are concerned that Justice Anthony Kennedy may be the swing vote in this matter and cast a decision that undermines marriage as between one man and one woman. 

These fears stem from his earlier decisions that decriminalized certain deviant sexual behaviors.

Most states, 41 to be exact, have laws which recognize the sanctity of traditional marriage and prohibit the dilution of the standard. This broad popularity for protecting marriage may sway the Justices to render a narrow verdict that minimizes the damage to marriage. In such a case, the Justices may carefully word their ruling to grant the homosexual equivalency movement their demands in California while allowing other states to keep their laws.

Less likely is that the court will rule against four-fifths of all states and permit the destruction of their laws, thus placating the demands of homosexual radicals. However, such a ruling is possible.

Perhaps least likely, analysts say, is that the court will protect marriage altogether as what it is, the union between one man and one woman, intended for life and open to children. Unfortunately, the US Supreme Court has demonstrated its propensity to rule consistent with shifting opinion on landmark cases as has been noted at times in United States history. Still, if the court supports marriage and respects the will of the people who have passed perfectly reasonable laws to protect marriage, it will be seen as a great victory for faith, reason, and the rule of law.

Article brought to you by: Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)