The Founders of this great nation embraced the idea of building a moral and virtuous society in this country in a manner that would enable all peoples to be able to fulfill both their inalienable rights as well as their inalienable duties.
These inalienable rights and duties are part of what can be called Natural Law. From Moses to Cicero, to Washington, Jefferson, andFranklin, Natural Law has always defined the distinction between that which is just and that which is unjust, between right and wrong. The idea of “Justice at Nuremberg” was characterized by Natural Law, since according to Nazi German law – the murder of Jews, gypsies, and certain other groups was entirely legal. No society or government should be able to legislate laws or rules that undermine these Natural Laws. Just as a government is proscribed from legalizing murder and theft, so too may it not undermine other Natural Laws.
Marriage has been defined by the very fabrics of history, universal cultural norms, and Natural Law as being between man and woman. Marriage combines in a union of life, love, and fidelity two people, capable of fathering and mothering offspring. It is more than mere kinship or friendship, it is a social and legal bond designed by Natural Law to procreate and continue the existence of mankind. Undermining an institution that has been designed by history and Natural Law to vouchsafe the future of mankind can be compared to unleashing chemical and nuclear hazards that can also undermine mankind’s future. Same gender marriages undermine Natural Law.
Furthermore, once we begin to redefine the basic integrity of the family structure in this nation, state, or city, we begin to fall down a slippery slope. Such a move will give rise to a movement to legalize the right to have multiple wives. It will give legitimacy to those who wish to allow marriages to one’s sister, daughter, son, or to two sisters simultaneously. It will even give legitimacy to those who wish to enter the bonds of matrimony with favorite pets and animals.
Modern social science and scientific inquiry has demonstrated the need of both a mother and a father to help foster the normal
psycho-social development of children. While there are times when this is not possible, government should make every effort to improve the ideal environment in which children should be raised. Redefining marriage will lead to a disaster similar to that which Romania experienced in its orphan crisis in the late sixties and early seventies. The Romanian orphan crisis led to a situation where thousands of children were raised outside the structure of families as envisioned by Natural Law. The results were catastrophic and dysfunctional behaviors. There will always be exceptions, but it is clearly in the state’s interest to ensure that future children be given the best chances of success possible. Redefining marriages against the state interest in order to allow some members of society to co-opt a term is wrong.
It has always been in the interest of the state to make sure that its citizens and its institutions remain stable. For example, in our country it is the belief of the state that ownership of a home provides for more social stability than a transient life style – even for those who rent. The state believes that home owners care more about what happens in their streets, villages and towns because they have a greater stake in things. The state, therefore, has provided tax deductions for homeowners whereas apartment renters do not have these same tax deductions. This is not about discrimination. It is about the state interest.
To redefine the parameters of marriage is a subtle, sarcastic, and insidious attempt to undermine the beliefs and principles of those who uphold the sanctity of Natural Law. It is an insult to Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and practitioners of other religions of this great nation.
It is our inalienable duty, regardless of our race, religion, or creed, to uphold the Natural definition of marriage and provide future generations with the time-honored and tested cultural institutions that will give them the best chances to succeed that we can. As citizens of this nation we are dismayed and troubled by the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act.