H/T to The New Civil Rights Movement for this story.
Those crazy kids at the American Family Association announced they were running an ad in the Washington Post March 24 that is an open letter to the Supreme Court, "reminding" them that their marriage ruling should comply with (AFA's mangled interpretation of) biblical law. Here are a few choice quotes:
"As you deliberate on marriage, REMEMBER WHOSE IDEA IT WAS IN THE FIRST PLACE."
...
"Marriage was neither manmade nor created by any law or Constitution. It was God’s plan and purpose for civilization from the beginning."
...
"Will you bend what God designed merely to suit the desires of man, knowing that you do so at the expense of children, perhaps even civilization itself?"
...
"You would be saying that God has no place in our public square and, in a nation founded to secure freedom for those being persecuted for their faith, such a decision would be a tragic irony."
...
"If your decision to resolve this matter forces same-sex marriage on America, you will have settled nothing. We urge the Court to adjudicate rightly that which is God’s alone to decide."
Where to begin with this twaddle? Join me below the orange thought bubble for my notes on it.
1) Once again, they are conflating procreation with marriage. While these two things are often connected, they are in no way mutually inclusive.
2) They constantly boil marriage down to one thing: sex. (It happens most often when discussing marriage equality, but I've seen it happen in general, too. "Fewer people are getting married because more women are giving it away for free" is a quote I've heard by one of the interchangeable RW talking heads.)
I really want to ask these people: "When you got married, did you do it because you had met the person who most filled you with joy, who you wanted to wake up next to every morning and come home to every night for the rest of your life, who made you feel like a more worthy person just by being in your life, and who you wanted to be with more than anyone else in the world? Or did you just want a church-sanctioned way to get laid?"
I won't deny that a healthy sexual relationship is an important part of marriage, but it is by no means the only or even the primary thing in most of them.
3) I am a heterosexual woman about to marry a heterosexual man. We have made the conscious choice to not have children. Meanwhile, I know so many same-sex couples who have children and are incredible parents. By the AFA's definition, my marriage is the bigger threat to civilization.
4) It can't be said enough: marriage is a legal definition, not a religious one. A WEDDING may or may not be religious; but, no matter how religious the couple is, the MARRIAGE is still a legal construct. That's why we file papers with and get marriage licenses from the government, not the house of worship. (I imagine there are some HOWs that have the couple file something with them, and there are religious marriage documents - like the ketubah in Jewish ceremonies - but they are in addition to the legal papers that must be filed.) I have no doubt there are LGBTQ couples who want a religious blessing of their marriage, but the vast majority want the legal protections that marriage comes with.
Just about all of these couples are going to stay together and raise families whether the AFA likes it or not. Telling them they can't get married is not going to cause them to turn around and marry someone of the opposite sex.
(An aside to that last bit: Ever notice how the anti-LGBTQ arguments from folks like the AFA and Ben Carson seem to emphasize that 'gay sex' is SO VERY AWESOME that everyone is going to drop their opposite-sex partners as soon as they can legally wed someone of the same gender? Makes you wonder what sort of research they've been doing, doesn't it?)
In short: No matter how much much as the AFA and others like them wish it to be so, America is not governed by religious doctrine. They are free to worship as they see fit and exclude anyone they want from that, but they do not get to claim biblical rule over the entire country. It really and truly is unconstitutional. Hopefully the SCOTUS will remember that.