There is a battle looming, and the sides have already begun tochoose the time and place of their battle.
The battle? The definition and place marriage holds in oursociety. In June, the United States Supreme Court overturned aTexas law that banned sodomy.
Last week, the Massachusetts Supreme Court declared that thestate it presides over had erred by creating a law that banshomosexuals from being married.
In Indiana a similar law is being challenged in our SupremeCourt.
But the battle has only begun.
I personally have nothing against homosexuals, just like I don'thave anything personal against liberals. If a person wants to beintimate with someone of the same sex (or be a liberal for thatmatter), that is just fine with me. I disapprove of both of thosethings, but that is his life and he can choose to live it how hechooses.
Marriage, on the other hand, is a different story. Marriage, forall of time, has been defined as a union between a man and a woman.It is sad that we as Americans are approaching a point in ourhistory where we have to have a constitutional amendment to definesuch a simple thing.
I have known homosexuals and have been privileged to call a fewof them friends. But I don't think that they should get married.Why? Because I feel (as does more than 60 percent of Americans)that marriage is the most basic element of our society, an elementthat is directly tied to raising children.
If we allow homosexuals to marry, then we will eventually beforced to allow them to adopt and raise children. Impartial studyafter impartial study has shown that the best way to raise a childis in a home with one mother and one father.
I will admit, the divorce rate in America does not play wellinto this situation. Heterosexual couples have a hard enough timekeeping together, even for the sake of the family unit. However,research in Norway (where homosexual marriage has been legal formore than a decade) has shown that the length of time homosexualcouples stay married is even shorter.
But the basic fact still remains: Most Americans opposehomosexual marriage, and their representatives have passed lawsbanning it. They've passed laws banning sodomy, and many stateshave laws banning homosexual adoption.
But, as always, what liberals will never be able to dolegislatively, they do through ultra-left, fringe judges appointedfor life terms to our nations courts. I could tie this column intoGeorge W. Bush's court appointees, but those who know what's goingon with that will see the connection.
So the battle approaches. When America's senators will have tochoose, stand with the homosexual special-rights lobby, or standwith the majority of Americans. The time will soon come whenAmerica's state legislators will have to choose between standingwith the exaggerated "need" for homosexual unions, or with theircitizens. The day is coming when a constitutional amendment willonce and for all define marriage as a union between a man and awoman. A conservative agenda? Perhaps. The desire of a majority ofAmericans?
Absolutely.
Write to Russell at rlg@temporalfront.com
visit http://www.temporalfront.com
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
