The Decision

I mentioned in my last post that I was going to be addressing controversial topics. Well..here we go

 

 supreme-court-clipart

Should a court of appeals change the historically sound definition of marriage?

 

Is it the right or the duty of a court of appeals to decide the future of a country’s marriage law? Can a small group of judges, forever adjust the anthropological pattern of the family to satisfy the few?  Is it even in their stewardship to make such a far-reaching, impactful decision?

Evidently, five judges believe that it is.

Fortunately, not all of the nine agreed. Justice Roberts made this comment in his dissenting opinion,

“This universal definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman is no historical coincidence. Marriage did not come about as a result of a political movement, discovery, disease, war, religious doctrine, or any other moving force of world history—and certainly not as a result of a prehistoric decision to exclude gays and lesbians. It arose in the nature of things to meet a vital need: ensuring that children are conceived by a mother and father committed to raising them in the stable conditions of a lifelong relationship. See G. Quale, A History of Marriage Systems 2 (1988); cf. M. Cicero, De Officiis 57 (W. Miller transl. 1913) (“For since the reproductive instinct is by nature’s gift the common possession of all living creatures, the first bond of union is that between husband and wife; the next, that between parents and children; then we find one home, with everything in common.”)

This war on marriage is likely to be one of the longest battles humanity will ever see waged.  It will be decades – generations – before the ramifications of the change in the definition of marriage are fully realized. Those who think they are being offended or injured now will be woefully unable to make restitution to those who are truth the victims – the children.

The carnage of this war on family, on motherhood, fatherhood and on children’s development will be far reaching. As marriage is re-defined, so have they now re-defined parenthood and family.

Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse states, “The essential public reason for marriage is to attach mothers and fathers to their children and to one another.” Morse goes on to say, “Children are entitled to a relationship with both of their parents. This is justice for the child. Children have an interest in the stability of the parent’s union.”

All that makes perfect sense, still…It is not all there is…

As a defender of traditional marriage. It is my position there is also higher law and Lawgiver who has made a statement on what marriage is and what children deserve,

“Husband and wife have a solemn responsibility to love and care for each other and for their children. “Children are an heritage of the Lord” (Psalms 127:3). Parents have a sacred duty to rear their children in love and righteousness, to provide for their physical and spiritual needs, to teach them to love and serve one another, to observe the commandments of God and to be law-abiding citizens wherever they live. Husbands and wives—mothers and fathers—will be held accountable before God for the discharge of these obligations.

The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity. Happiness in family life is most likely to be achieved when founded upon the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ.”

 

The role of a mother and a father in the lives and development of children is crucial. Laws cannot change this or minimize or build myths around this truth. Mothers and fathers are not interchangeable. Having two adults in the home does not replace the importance of an active, participating mother and father. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony. Children are entitled to be reared by a father and a mother.

To re-quote Justice Roberts, Marriage “arose …to meet a vital need: ensuring that children are conceived by a mother and father committed to raising them in the stable conditions of a lifelong relationship.” Marriage is also in place, because it is ordained of God. Families are a crucial unit not only of this society and of heavenly societies. Family is eternal in nature. To toss out our or re-structure it because 5 judges have allowed it, it wrong.

We need to recommit ourselves to our children. With more than 40% of children born outside of marriage, with courts deciding what marriage is, or what parents can now be – we are failing our own children.

I’ll wrap this up by sharing a link to Cathy Ruse ‘s video. She raises some excellent points that are worth considering.

I hope you will ask yourselves – “What do I want my children or my children’s children to gain from this crucial time in history?”

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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