Marriage, Religion, and Democracy

on May 22, 2006

James Tonkowich
May 22, 2006

 

In an article in the May 15, 2006 Weekly Standard entitled “Banned in Boston,” marriage scholar Maggie Gallagher explored how same-sex marriage would impact religious freedom in America.  After interviewing experts from both sides of the debate, her conclusion is not at all encouraging.  Gallagher writes:

Precisely because support for marriage is public policy, once marriage includes gay couples, groups who oppose gay marriage are likely to be judged in violation of public policy, triggering a host of negative consequences, including the loss of tax-exempt status. Because marriage is not a private act, but a protected public status, the legalization of gay marriage sends a strong signal that orientation is now on a par with race in the nondiscrimination game.

The IRD was founded to address the greatest threats to religion and democracy.  At the time, in 1981, communism was arguably great threat and sadly many churches sided with the communists.  Today same-sex marriage, also supported by many churches, represents a profound threat to religion and democracy—specifically to religious freedom—in America for precisely the reason Gallagher states:  the debate is framed as a civil rights issue.   If same-sex marriage becomes the law of the land, opposition to same-sex marriage and homosexual behavior will be viewed as a civil rights violation—even if that opposition is for religious reasons.

This is why I have joined other religious and civic leaders—Protestant, Catholic, Jewish, and Mormon—in the Religious Coalition for Marriage.  The Letter from Civic Leaders that I signed states, “The danger [redefining marriage to accommodate any individual preference] portends for family life and a general condition of social justice and ordered liberty is hard to overestimate.”  In fact, we have seen some of the results in Europe and Canada.

Hudson Institute scholar, Stanley Kurtz has chronicled the results of same-sex marriage and legal partnerships on marriage, family, and out-of-wedlock birthrates in, SwedenScandinavia, and the Netherlands.  He has also written about the logical outcome of same-sex marriage in the Netherlands:  multi-partner “marriage” (in this case three).  In Canada, the Roman Catholic bishop of Calgary, Fred Henry, has been accused of hate speech for upholding the teachings of his church by publicly opposing same-sex marriage legislation.

Beyond the threat to religion and democracy, it should come as no surprise to Christians that modern social science has shown how deviation from a biblical understanding of marriage as the union of man and woman is unhealthy for the partners and for children.  The Religious Coalition for Marriage web site includes the “Top 10 Social Science Arguments against Same-Sex Marriage”  and church bulletin inserts:  “Why Marriage Matters: Seven Scientific Reasons” and “Why Not Gay Marriage?” that explain the issues simply and succinctly.  These can be downloaded and distributed to your congregation.

After years of sexual “liberation” and no-fault divorce, marriage—even marriage in the Church—is in a dilapidated and debilitated state.  Same-sex marriage will advance this breakdown of marriage.  At the same time, as Seana Sugrue argues in her essay in the book The Meaning of Marriage: Family, State, Market, and Morals, same-sex marriage is an “assault upon religion, especially those religious which oppose it.”

The hour is late, but there is till time to act to strengthen marriage in the Church and the public square for the common good, the sake of our children, and the preservation of freedom.


       Follow TheIRD on Twitter

 

No comments yet

The work of IRD is made possible by your generous contributions.

Receive expert analysis in your inbox.