- The Washington Times - Thursday, January 22, 2004

At a recent forum of D.C. Democrats, a questioner asked whether homosexual “marriage” should be on the platform. Talk-radio straightshooter Joe Madison gave the best answer of all the panelists. The issue is a “distraction,” he said, adding that there are far more important issues that are worthy of serious discussion. Indeed, there should not be any confusion about who or what constitutes a marriage. Yet, Congressis considering amending the Constitution.

One of the reasons we are beingdistracted about gay”marriages” is because Americans are carving out new labels and role-playing relationships quicker than new subdivisions are being built in suburbia.

Most Americans understand what constitutes a marriage, and they support a constitutional amendment. According to a March 2003 Wirthlin poll, 62 percent of Americans agree that a marriage is between a man and a woman, while 12 percent don’t know.

Republicans and Democrats are so frightened of losing the “gay” vote and “gay” money that many of them are saying that anything goes. Civil unions are OK, they say, so long as they don’t usurp states’ rights.

One Republican I know wants legislation that would treat the abused domestic partner in a “gay” relationship the same as a wife who has been battered by her husband. Coretta Scott King supports same-sex marriage as a civil right.

All unions are not created equally — and they should not be treated equally.

The outcome of the debate to save the institution of marriage is as important as the way we conduct that debate. As President Bush said, “The same moral tradition that defines marriage also teaches that each individual has dignity and value in God’s sight.”

All sides of the argument have polling data to support their points of view. Wedged in the middle of the moral debate are our children. On the one hand, we tell them to value and respect the “differences” they see in people (race, “sexual” preference, ethnicity, spiritual, marital status, physical impairment, etc.). With the other hand, we tell them to point and exploit those differences (quotas, affirmative action, slavery reparations, etc.).

But there also is a third hand — the one that lifts hypocrisy to new modern-day heights. Illegal immigrants want the jobs other Americans don’t want. Our borders should be open so all may enjoy America’s bountiful fruits of freedom. Quality education is the new “civil right.” Teach non-English speakers in their native tongue. Hail to the Redskins. Down with Palestinians. Homosexual rights now.

America’s melting pot has become of crock.

Americans are mired in labels (and not just those of the political sort) to the point that the Pat Buchanans are worried about what will become of their race. Liberals label their concerns racism; “confusism” is a more appropriate term.

Just yesterday in this very space, Suzanne Fields reminded us that the C word — confusion — has overwhelmed teen-age girls. While we are of the mind that girls will grow up to give birth to and nurture future generations, the reality is that they are indulging in a neutered area that psychology calls “heteroflexible” — a new label that means gay by choice, sexually active by design. Queer eyes, in other words, are not only gazing upon straight guys.

If you are old-school and thought the label “bisexual” had that cultural area covered, think again.

Unless, of course, you are a politician. The average politician cannot and does not speak in those terms. In fact, you did not hear Mr. Bush, in his State of the Union address, say “gay” or “heterosexual.” The Bible does not use such labels either.

The legislation currently under consideration on Capitol Hill says: “Marriage in the United States shall consist only of the union of a man and a woman. Neither this Constitution or the constitution of any State, nor state or federal law, shall be construed to require that marital status or the legal incidents thereof be conferred upon unmarried couples or groups.”

The amendment goes too far for many Americans and not far enough for some. And don’t forget that 12 percent in the Wirthlin poll that simply doesn’t know. But we know, don’t we, that some adults always are at once undecided, confused and distracted — regardless of the subject matter?

Perhaps that is why Mr. Bush spoke up, surprising many conservatives, including Sen. Wayne Allard, the sponsor of the federal marriage amendment, who said he “did not expect the president to come out so strongly.”

Like Joe Madison said, there are real serious issues that must be discussed this election year. It is up to the majority of us who are not distracted and confused to show the minority the right way to go.

Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times is switching its third-party commenting system from Disqus to Spot.IM. You will need to either create an account with Spot.im or if you wish to use your Disqus account look under the Conversation for the link "Have a Disqus Account?". Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide