KNIGHT: Recovering the meaning of marriage

Not a scheme for alienation, it’s the purpose of creation

Question of the Day

Should Congress make English the official language of the U.S.?

View results

The stage is being set for the U.S. Supreme Court to manufacture a “right” to homosexual “marriage” in the Constitution. That’s the document written by the same American Founders whose minds the court read in 1973 to include fever dreams of unlimited abortions.

This time around, the court might desist. We can only hope.

Meanwhile, the Orwellian juggernaut of intolerance in the name of tolerance rolls on, with Mozilla Firefox CEO Brendan Eich the latest victim. Mr. Eich resigned Thursday for the crime of donating $1,000 in 2008 to support Proposition 8. He was in good company. California’s marriage amendment was widely approved by the electorate — including 70 percent of black California voters.

I guess they should all be fired from whatever jobs they have.

Marriage is not just any relationship. It predates the law and the Constitution, and is an anthropological reality, not primarily a legal one. No civilization can survive without it, and those societies that allowed it to become irrelevant have faded into history.

It’s one thing to have the idea that a cow is now a horse. It’s another to use the power of the law to impose this delusion on everybody else. Same-sex “marriage” is a direct attack on freedom of conscience for millions of people.

Marriage is the union of the two sexes, not just two people. It is the binding of two families, and the foundation for establishing kinship patterns and family names, passing on property and providing the optimal environment for raising children.

Marriage is the only type of coupling capable of natural reproduction of the human race — a man and a woman. Children need mothers and fathers, and marriage is society’s way of obtaining them.

Even childless marriages are a social anchor for children, who observe adults as role models. Children learn crucial things about family life by seeing relationships up close: interactions between men and women, husbands and wives, mothers and fathers, and parents to children of the same and opposite sexes.

Human experience and a vast body of social science research show that children do best in married, mother-father households. Junk science can’t change that, nor can it prove that people are “born gay” with no hope of change.

After Massachusetts legalized homosexual “marriage” in 2004, the Catholic Church had to shut down its large adoption agency, and later in the District of Columbia. This denies orphans one of the best chances of being adopted in an intact household with a mother and father. Collateral damage. Shrug.

Marriage laws have been part of the cultural and legal structures for thousands of years in all societies long before the modern “gay” movement became active in the 1970s. It is profoundly misleading for media to refer to marriage laws as “gay-marriage bans,” as if the laws never had any purpose other than excluding same-sex couples.

Citing laws in some states that once barred interracial marriage is also misleading. The very essence of marriage — the joining of the two sexes — was never at issue when the Supreme Court in Loving v. Virginia (1967) struck down Virginia’s law barring interracial marriage.

Hijacking the moral capital of the black civil rights movement to turn a wrong into a “right” is part of a detailed strategy in the 1989 book “After the Ball,” by public relations experts Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, who advised: “In any campaign to win over the public, gays must be portrayed as victims in need of protection so that straights will be inclined by reflex to adopt the role of protector.”

They suggested branding people with traditional values as “haters” and “bigots.”

Story Continues →

View Entire Story
blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks
You Might Also Like
  • Maureen McDonnell looks on as her husband, former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, made a statement on Tuesday after the couple was indicted on corruption charges. (associated press)

    PRUDEN: Where have the big-time grifters gone?

  • This photo taken Jan. 9, 2014,  shows New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie gesturing as he answers a question during a news conference  at the Statehouse in Trenton.  Christie will propose extending the public school calendar and lengthening the school day in a speech he hopes will help him rebound from an apparent political payback scheme orchestrated by key aides. The early front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination will make a case Tuesday Jan. 14, 2014, that children who spend more time in school graduate better prepared academically, according to excerpts of his State of the State address obtained by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Mel Evans)

    BRUCE: Bombastic arrogance or humble determination? Chris Christie’s choice

  • ** FILE ** Secretary of State Hillary Rodham testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the deadly September attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

    PRUDEN: The question to haunt the West

  • Get Breaking Alerts