I recently sent a letter to our local newspaper about the Supreme Court's decision to redefine marriage. It was similar to the post about marriage I posted on this blog. There were a number of comments posted on the online edition of the paper. One man made the argument that the Supreme Court made the final decision and the debate is ended. This man's thoughts represent the thoughts of many people. I mentioned this to a number of friends and their response was similar to what I thought. If the decision had gone the other way, we know that it would not be the end of the debate. If the Supreme Court had voted one vote differently we would have heard lots of debating from those that oppose genuine marriage.
There were no winners in this court decision. Why do I say this? There was a lot of celebrating outside of the court building when the decision was made, but the celebrating was for something that will bring the celebrators their own destruction and the destruction of the country. The White House was made a mockery before the world by projecting a symbol of deviant diversity on it. In a figurative way, they celebrated the chains that bind them are made to appear more fashionable. Making this distortion to appear fashionable makes their chains all the more formidable. Those that are making these new laws are destroying the very fabric of our society. They are ripping away the very foundation of the freedoms they experience today. Marriage is one of the foundational institutions of a country. By counterfeiting marriage it weakens the country. When anything is counterfeited the counterfeit fights against the value of the genuine.
The main point I would like to share here is that the debate has not ended. One deciding vote by nine unelected judges does not change the importance of sharing the truth of genuine marriage. In fact, it should goad us on in sharing why the reasoning behind this unprecedented change is not founded on good logic. This is a very sensitive topic because it effects people we care about. The importance of this topic is such that I believe the cost of ignoring it is greater than any ostracism that would come from sharing the truth. It might be hard to think on serious things, but it is the right thing to do. I like this quote from John W. Gardner: "Moral seriousness does not resolve complex problems; it only impels us to face the problems rather than run away. Clearheadedness does not slay dragons; it only spares us the indignity of fighting paper dragons while the real ones are breathing down our necks. But those are not trivial advantages." The real decisions do not come from nine unelected judges, but start from the dinner time conversations that take place all across America. It has been said "Freedom rings where opinions clash." There is a real effort to stop the freedom of speech. A newspaper in Pennsylvania said it would not publish letters endorsing traditional marriage. They received a barrage of protests and slightly changed their policy saying they would still publish letters for a short time after the Supreme Court's decision to redefine marriage. I would encourage those who want to see freedom ring to write to your local paper or a blog that covers serious things, and let them know that there are people who believe that marriage is still one man and one woman. There are a lot of paper dragons out there taking the attention off from the matters that are really important.
All four dissenting judges gave written dissent opinions which is highly unusual. These men gave solid reasons for their dissent. Justice Scalia, the longest serving justice on the Supreme Court, gave a logical and impassioned dissent. Justice Kennedy gave the majority opinion and his reasons are widely recognized as being weak and based on emotion. His arguments largely were based on the idea that marriage is just about love which was addressed on this blog. There is a lot of information available which confirms the value of genuine marriage which is a big plus for those that want to weigh in on this landmark decision. History and biological fact are on the side of proponents of genuine marriage. The debate is far from over.