Polygamy Ruling Further Undermines Marriage and the Family
By L.A. Williams, Correspondent
Christian Action League
December 18, 2013
Nearly a week after a federal judge in Utah struck down a portion of that state’s polygamy ban – ruling that laws that prohibit a married person from cohabitating with another person are unconstitutional – the nation is considering the fallout.
“When marriage is elastic enough to mean anything, in due time it comes to mean nothing,” said Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, said “Redefining marriage to fulfill the desires of same-sex couples or polygamists only moves society away from this vital public interest and creates social chaos.”
The Rev. Mark Creech, executive director of the Christian Action League, said it is a sad commentary on our nation, when the judiciary seems to be taking its cues from reality television.
‘While the court didn’t strike down the entire polygamy law – a man still cannot legally marry more than one wife – Judge Clark Waddoups has endorsed a lifestyle that we know is detrimental to women and children and one that has been outlawed in our nation for more than a century,” he said.
The Utah case involved Kody Brown, the star of “Sister Wives,” which chronicles the life of the Mormon, his legal wife and the three other women with whom they live.
As conservative columnists and bloggers released “I told you so” statements last week, decrying the Supreme Court’s failure earlier this year to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act, defenders of the homosexual lobby insisted that they could not be blamed for the polygamy ruling since Judge Waddoups did not reference the DOMA case in his decision.
But Dr. Creech pointed out that there is no denying the slippery slope on which the nation is no longer poised, but already sliding.
He said the warning that legalizing homosexual practices would undermine laws against group marriage, and even more revolting behaviors such as bestiality and incest came long before the demise of DOMA.
In fact, in his dissent of Lawrence v. Texas, the precedent which formed the basis of Waddoups’ ruling, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia predicted a “massive disruption of the current social order.”
“State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of … validation of laws based on moral choices,” Scalia wrote as he defended Texas’ right to maintain its law against sodomy.
“Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision,” he added, explaining that it is impossible to distinguish homosexuality from other traditional “morals” offenses.
Dr. Creech said this is what happens when a nation mistakes licentiousness for liberty.
“When the Lawrence sodomy case came up, our nation’s High Court bowed to what it perceived as ‘an emerging awareness that liberty gives substantial protection to adult persons in decideding how to conduct their private lives in matters pertaining to sex,’” he said. “Unfortunately, the justices bought into the idea that members of a society can draw a line at their door and declare that what’s done inside is nobody else’s business.”
“The only way that could work is if the consequences of what happens behind closed doors could be contained there as well, which we know is impossible,” he added. “The truth is that once we take away a government’s right to hold its people to any kind of moral standard, we are left to deal with the result of that immorality.”
Perkins said the ruling shows a shift away from any consideration of what’s best for the next generation.
“Throughout history, marriage has been future-oriented, focused on the next generation and the best interests of children. The reality is that society needs children, and children need a mom and a dad,” he said.
Moore echoed that idea.
“This is what happens when marriage becomes about the emotional and sexual wants of adults, divorced from the needs of children for a mother and a father committed to each other for life,” he lamented. “Polygamy was outlawed in this country because it was demonstrated, again and again, to hurt women and children.”