What Must Be Done for the Future of Marriage

What Must Be Done for the Future of Marriage
In the wake of last month's Supreme Court rulings, where does the marriage movement go from here?

Many have been keen to point out that the U.S. supreme Cout refused to redefine marriage for the entire nation.  The Court refused to manufacture a constitutional "right" to same-sex marriage.

Citizens and their elected representatives remain free to discuss, debate and vote on marriage policy in all 50 states.  They still have the right to define marriage in civil law as the union of one man and one woman.  Justice Antonin Scalia's dissent, however, tells us to be clear-eyed: "I promise you this: The only thing that will 'confine' the court's holding is its sense of what it can get away with."

If it is clear that Americans are engaged in this democratic debate and care about the future of marriage, then the Court will be less likely to rule in an overreaching way again to remove the authority to take marriage policy from the people and their elected representatives.  First and foremost, defenders of marriage as the union of a man and a woman need to start living out that truth.

Long before we had a debate about same-sex anything, far too many heterosexuals bought into a liberal ideology about sexuality that makes a mess of marriage  -  with cohabitiation, no-fault divorce, extra-marital sex, non-marital childbearing, pornography and the hook-up culture all contributing to the breakdown of our marriage culture.  Husbands and wives should be faithful through thick and thin, till death parts them.

At one point in American life, virtually every child was given the great gift of being raised to adulthood by the man and the woman who gave them life.  Today, that number is under 50 percent in some communities.  Same-sex marriage didn't cause this sad situation, but it does nothing to help and will only make things worse.  After all, redefining marriage to make it simply about emotional companionship sends the signal that moms and dads are interchangeable.

Second, insist that the government respect those who continue to stand for marriage as the union of a man and a woman  -  and to insist that government not discriminate against them.  Policy should prohibit the government or anyone who receives taxpayers' money from discriminating against them in empoloyment, licensing, accreditation or contracting.

But sadly, we already have seen that many of those who favor redifining marriage are willing to use the coercive force of law to marginalize and penalize those who hold the historic view  -  even if it means trampling First Amendment protections of religious liberty.

Third and finally, we need to redouble our efforts to explain what marriage is, why marriage matters and what the consequences are of redefining marriage. The Left wants to insist that the redefinition of marriage is "inevitable."  The only way to guarantee a political loss, however, is to sit idly by.

We must develop and multiply our artistic, pastoral and reasoned defenses of the conjugal view as the truth about marriage, and to make ever plainer our policy reasons for enacting it.
   (by Ryan T.Anderson, Heritage Foundation, newsletters@heritage.org)