|
The
views expressed
on this page are soley those of the author and do not
necessarily
represent the views of County News Online
|
The Daily Signal
Pro-Lifers
Didn’t Give Up After Roe v. Wade. Here Are 3 Critical Steps to Take on
Marriage.
Ryan T. Anderson
June 29, 2015
Friday’s Supreme Court decision is unadulterated judicial activism.
As Chief Justice John Roberts said in dissent: “Today’s decision rests
on nothing more than the majority’s own conviction that same-sex
couples should be allowed to marry because they want to. … Whatever
force that belief may have as a matter of moral philosophy, it has no
more basis in the Constitution than did the naked policy preferences”
in other rightly condemned activist decisions.
Nothing in the Constitution requires the redefinition of marriage in
all 50 states, and five unelected justices do not have the authority to
redefine marriage everywhere. Still, the question now is: What do we do?
I suggest that pro-marriage citizens should follow the example of
pro-life citizens.
In January 1973, the Supreme Court created a constitutional right to
abortion in Roe v. Wade. Pro-lifers were told they had lost, that the
issue was settled. The law taught citizens that they had a new right,
and public opinion quickly swung against pro-lifers by as much as a
two-to-one margin.
Pundits insisted that all young people were for abortion, and elites
ridiculed pro-lifers for being on the “wrong side of history.”
But pro-lifers put their hand to the plow, and today we reap the
fruits. My generation is more pro-life than my parents’. A majority of
Americans now support pro-life policies. In the last decade, states
have enacted more laws protecting unborn babies than were passed in the
previous 30 years.
What happened?
The pro-life community stood up and responded to a bad court ruling.
Academics wrote books and articles making the scientific and
philosophical case for life. Statesmen like Henry Hyde, Edwin Meese,
and Ronald Reagan used the bully pulpit to advance the culture of life.
Activists and lawyers got together, formed coalitions, and devised
effective strategies.
Now everything the pro-life movement did needs to be done again on this
new frontier of marriage. Here are three critical steps to take.
First, we must call the court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges what it
is: judicial activism. Just as the pro-life movement successfully
rejected Roe v. Wade and exposed its lies about unborn life and about
the Constitution, we must make it clear to our fellow citizens that
Obergefell v. Hodges does not tell the truth about marriage or about
our Constitution.
Second, we must protect our freedom to speak and live according to our
beliefs. The pro-life movement accomplished this by ensuring that
pro-life doctors and nurses would never have to perform abortions. It
won the battle to prevent taxpayer money from paying for abortions. And
it made sure that pro-lifers and pro-life organizations could not be
discriminated against by the government.
Pro-marriage forces need to do the same: Ensure that we have freedom
from government coercion to lead our lives, rear our children, and
operate our businesses and our charities in accord with our beliefs
about marriage. Likewise, we must ensure that the government does not
discriminate against citizens or organizations because of their belief
that marriage is the union of husband and wife.
Third, we must redouble our efforts to make the case for marriage in
the public square. To do this, we must use reason and our own personal
stories. This is the most compelling way to bring the truth about
marriage to light.
Read this article with links and a video at The Daily Signal
|
|
|
|