Family Action Council of Tennessee President David Fowler explains why those pushing to redefine marriage need to meet their burden of proof. And if they can't, the “marriage equality” argument has no foundation to stand on.
The issue is not whether homosexual conduct is good or bad. It is not whether those who engage in homosexual relations can be productive members of society. And it is not about benefits. That is what same-sex marriage advocates want people to think. But those are not the issue.
The issue is whether our society should continue to embrace natural marriage – the union of a man and woman — or embrace other forms of relationships as marriages.
However, the burden of proving that this change will improve our common good is on same-sex marriage advocates, not on those who support the long-standing meaning and value of natural marriage.
Those who support change just can’t be the “party of no” because they are against natural marriage. They need to tell Tennesseans what they are for so that Tennesseans can see how it “stacks up” in comparison to natural marriage.
And if same-sex marriage advocates want equality, then the burden is on them to prove that a same-sex union is essentially the same as a heterosexual union in all regards. Otherwise, everyone knows that there is nothing “unequal” or “unfair” about treating two different things two different ways.
If they can’t meet their burden of proof, then the whole “marriage equality” argument falls to the ground.
Read David Fowler's full commentary over on Citizen Link.