Marriage, again

August 5, 2010

So, a Federal judge has decided that the definition of marriage that was pretty much universal throughout human history is unconstitutional. I have a couple of things to say:

1. Even if I thought “same-sex marriage” was a good idea, I think I’d be upset about it being imposed by judicial fiat. (I’d say the same thing about Roe v. Wade.) If a judge can rule anything he doesn’t like unconstitutional, the Constitution is worthless. The Supreme Court’s rulings that ended legal segregation justifiably gave the judiciary a high moral standing, but those rulings were firmly based in the explicit wording of the 14th Amendment. We have nothing like that here. (Had the ERA been ratified, the judge might have had a leg to stand on.)

As The Other McCain said:

As I told Joe, decades of this sort of legal compulsion have brought us to the point where people feel they no longer have the the right to form their own opinions, and certainly are not free to express beliefs that contradict legally sanctioned dogma.

I bought a copy of the Federalist Papers the other day, and now I think when I read them I need to see what was said about checks on the judiciary, because those have been proving inadequate.

2. As I think I’ve said before, the justification for legally recognizing marriage is that it is the means by which civilized humans (as opposed to mere biological members of the human species) reproduce. Married couples are statistically more likely to raise children who are healthy and well-adjusted and contribute to society. (I added statistically because we all know people raised in a traditional marriage who didn’t turn out well, and lots of people raised by single parents who did. But the odds are much better for the ones raised by married parents.)

Even before the idea of “same-sex marriage” started to catch on, our society was already suffering because people were looking too much at a selfish evaluation of what their marriage provided for them, and not at the big picture about how it affected their children and others. I will grant that this sort of thing is the logical conclusion of where societal attitudes towards sex and marriage have been leading us, but that doesn’t mean it’s right or good.

Update: Just as I published this, Julia (on the other computer) said, “could you take a look at this?” and made me read an article on the Thomas Jefferson Education site. Coincidentally, it seems to be saying something very similar to the post I linked to above: Becoming a Real Woman.


One Response to “Marriage, again”

  1. […] 4, 2010 When I first mentioned that I’d bought a copy of The Federalist, I said: I bought a copy of the Federalist Papers the other day, and now I think […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: