If Gay Marriage Is Inevitable ...



Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse asks, if gay marriage is so inevitable, why is its progress always made possible by political favors, etc?

"...When I was in Springfield testifying before a committee in February, I witnessed the lobbying being done by the advocates for redefining marriage. Individual legislators who had not committed one way or the other on the issue were marched one by one into Speaker Madigan's office. We can only guess what was being said in these meetings. But not too many votes changed. At least, not enough votes changed to make a difference.

The "gay marriage is inevitable" mantra seems to mean one thing: rich people of both parties in America have decided that they want gay marriage. They expect that their money will buy them the influence they need to get it done." (Christian Post)

If you live in Illinois and your state representative in Springfield has not heard from you yet, please pick up the phone.


  1. John
    Posted May 30, 2013 at 2:47 am | Permalink

    I have read many times over that traditional marriage is good for society. why is that? Because if it were not for heterosexual unions, there would be no society. Case in point. Let's say you take 1,000 healthy heterosexual couple and 100,000 healthy gay couples and place them in a separate land with all the necessary needs. In 100 years, the gay population would be near extinct, and the heterosexual population would be continuing. Nature does not endorse same sex relationships. If it did, those relationships would have the exact same abilities and natural "rights: as heterosexual couples do.

  2. Taylor
    Posted May 30, 2013 at 11:32 am | Permalink

    As long as heterosexual couples procreate, there will always be homosexuals. You do the procreation for us!

    Nature has provided its own way of continuing the homosexual population.

    Nature has also seen fit to make some heterosexual couples sterile. What happened to their "natural rights"?

  3. Posted May 30, 2013 at 5:34 pm | Permalink

    Douglas Farrow has a short essay with the fetching title of, "A Nation of Bastards."

    The point is simple: once the law is used to enforce a false equality between same-sex and different-sex couples, society can no longer be built on the foundation that societies have always rested upon--natural families arising through natural procreation.

    Having deemed biological sex and biological parenting as irrelevant to human relations, the law is left treating everyone the same--hence, we become a nation of bastards with families formed not by blood but by law. And in turn, the law will be increasingly disabled from recognizing, regulating, or encouraging any conduct related to biological differences in sex. Consanguinity laws are utterly irrelevant to same-sex coupling, but the law cannot distinguish between same- and different- sex couples, so those laws will fall. Paternity is irrelevant (witness the recent Iowa court decision that eliminated fathers in favor of "non-birth parents" in the public record), so concepts like fidelity cannot be encouraged as a public policy. Perhaps worse, same-sex couples are inherently sterile, so introducing children to such a relationship tends toward commoditizing humans--all or part of a human must come from some third party.

    The argument that much damage is done to marriage already is simply a dodge--marriage serves a very real, concrete public policy purpose so further damaging it is not the right answer...especially when stable male/female marriages are perhaps the best tool for resolving so many social ills, as Mark Regnerus ably suggests in his research.

    (excellent comment made on the VC blog)

Comments are temporarily disabled. Please try back later.