August
07th
  1:46:47 AM

Prop 8 judge displays ignorance of marriage

Jennifer Roback Morse, foundress and president of the Ruth Institute, laments the overturn of Proposition 8 by Judge Vaughn Walker, who is widely reported to be g*y.

The Ruth Institute has been active in the efforts to educate the public about the essential public purpose of marriage, the social benefits of natural marriage, and the harms to society from redefining marriage. Dr. Morse is a former economics professor at Yale and George Mason Universities. In a press release she says:

Judge Walker’s reasoning today in overturning Prop 8 illustrates that he does not understand the essential public purpose of marriage, which is to attach mothers and fathers to their children and to one another. He replaces this public purpose with private purposes of adults’ feelings and desires.

By the time Judge Walker and his ilk are finished, there will be nothing left of marriage but a government registry of friendships. The essential problem of attaching children to the mothers and fathers will be pushed aside, and will have to be solved some other way.

* Redefining marriage as the union of any two persons will undermine the biological basis for parenthood, which amounts to a redefinition of parenthood.

* Same sex Marriage will marginalize men from the family.

* Redefining marriage will increase the power of the state over civil society, including religious bodies.

Surely the voters have the right to be consulted before making such a major change in public policy,” Dr. Morse said today. “Judge Walker has no right to disparage the voters of California the way he does in this opinion. “His opinion amounts to this sloppy syllogism. ‘First, I don’t understand that there are any arguments in favor of natural marriage. Therefore, there are no arguments in favor of natural marriage. Conclusion: unlawful animus against gays and lesbians is the only possible reason 7 million voters supported natural marriage.’

The fact that he doesn’t understand the arguments, doesn’t mean there aren’t any. And it is truly unprecedented for a judge to decide that some ideas cannot even be contested in public debate. The Ruth Institute will continue to educate the public about the significant role of natural marriage in society, and the harms from redefining marriage.



 
about this blog | Bookmark and Share

Search this blog

 Subscribe to FamilyEdge
rss RSS feed of posts

 Recent Posts
World Congress of Families 2013
19 May 2013
Rise of the stay-at-home dad
15 May 2013
Record proportion of new mothers are college educated
13 May 2013
Brenda Heist case reveals increase in mothers who leave their children
11 May 2013
Cleveland abduction victims’ lives changed forever
8 May 2013

 MercatorNet blogs
Style and culture: Tiger Print
US political scene: Sheila Liaugminas
News about bioethics: BioEdge
From the editors: Conniptions

 Archive
May 2013 | Apr 2013 | Mar 2013 | more >>

 From MercatorNet's home page

EU shows how to do a dodgy survey
16 May 2013
The EU's largest-ever survey of hate crimes and discrimination against LGBT people claims that they labour under a terrible burden.…

How legal euthanasia changed Belgium for ever
17 May 2013
The ideology of absolute self-determination has become sacred and unquestionable.

The fallacy of a happy, productive and ageing work force
17 May 2013
Glib answers will not conjure away the hard, cold fact that workers everywhere are getting older and older.

What is parenthood?
15 May 2013
In debates about the family, some social scientists are asserting the primacy of theory over facts. Is this science?

Reason and responsibility: the Rana Plaza collapse
13 May 2013
The Rana Plaza tragedy was an outcome of a corrupt system that is rotten to the core. Who should --…


 Tags
fashion, gender equality, child welfare, ageing population, motherhood, South Africa, children's health, HomeMakers Project, smacking, happiness, Sweden, same-sex marriage, AIDS, daycare, prostitution, Barack Obama, cohabitation, religion, schools, poverty, one-child policy, adolescence, sleep, mental health, childcare, social networking, sexual behaviour, unemployment, New Zealand, education, parents, abortion, United Nations, work, fathers, character education, texting, adoption, teen pregnancy, violence, teenagers, Facebook, family policy, HIVAIDS, France, ageing, Australia, sexualisation of children, television, economics, obesity, self-control, single motherhood, research, names, friendship, video games, birth control, anger, families, homosexuality, marriage, recession, gender, child wellbeing, education of children, family, girls, character, dating, demography, large families, Hollywood, China, Canada, divorce, celebrities, psychology, teenage pregnancy, media, same-sex parenting, polygamy, family meals, youth, gendercide, baby boomers, contraception, abstinence, modesty, social media, family breakdown, family economics, children, morality, suicide, child behaviour, commitment, National Marriage Project, family relationships, men, technology, books, parental rights, young adult, immigration, language, media ethics, child development, Spain, child obesity, USA, child safety, trafficking, feminism, health, adolescents, UK, homeschooling, mothers, pornography, child abuse, Africa, child poverty, parenthood, working mothers, internet, brain, family values, boys, United States, sex education, European Union, emerging adults, work-life balance, women, pregnancy, parenting, family structure, fertility, fatherhood, internet safety,