Obergefall v. Hodges

I have never read a Supreme Court case before this week. At first I felt like I was slogging through wet concrete, but as I continued to read I began understanding. This case, Obergefall v. Hodges, or the legalization of same-sex marriage, is of deep personal importance to me as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints. I believe, “that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.” (1) This case legalized an act with which I spiritually, religiously, and deeply disagree.
Political Process
Firstly, I concur with Justice C.J. Roberts who said, “Whether same-sex marriage is a good idea should be of no concern to us.” He further comments, “Supporters of same-sex marriage have achieved considerable success persuading their fellow citizens—through the democratic process—to adopt their view. That ends today.” (2) According to Cathy Ruse, “By 2012, over 50 million Americans had stepped into voting booths, said no to a change in the definition of marriage, and
did all they could as citizens
to preserve the law of man/woman marriage as the law of their land. … All that can really be said is that a handful of liberal judges embraced it and forced it on the rest of us.” (3) Also consider Justice Thomas J, who adds, “Had the majority allowed the definition of marriage to be left to the political process—as the Constitution requires—the People could have considered the religious liberty implications of deviating from the traditional definition as part of their deliberative process. Instead, the majority’s decision short-circuits that process, with potentially ruinous consequences for religious liberty.” (4) I'm still not clear why this case went to the Supreme Court in the first place instead of honoring the citizen's wishes to protect the laws that were already IN PLACE in their states. Also, our friends in the LGBTQ community were already given all the rights as those who are not before this case. For example, they could have easily chosen who inherits their belongings by writing a will. Or who had the authority to make end of life decisions through a power of attorney. As citizens of this country they were also afforded government benefits when appropriate. They were certainly free to plan and have a wedding, buy rings, and commit to one another. Having a government issued stamp of approval on their relationships seems pointless.   
Essential Roles
I state, along with Cathy Ruse (3) that “as a mother, I know that no man can be a mother.
No man can be a mother.
Just as I could never be a father. And children need both. … If two fathers are the same as a mother and a father that means mothers are dispensable. They are unneeded. They are unnecessary. They can be disposed of. And that is a lie! As a mother, I know that is a lie.” I have two beautiful daughters of my own. I am raising them with their father, my husband, together as a family. I see daily how different women and men regard everything, but specifically parenting. I see that mothers (and fathers) provide essential roles to the rearing of children. Roles that cannot be filled by the opposite sex, regardless of their sexual orientation. From the Obergefall v. Hodges case, Justice C. J. Roberts states, “Marriage did not come about as a result of a political movement, discovery, disease, war, religious doctrine, or any other moving force of world history—and certainly not as a result of a prehistoric decision to exclude gays and lesbians. It arose in the nature of things to meet a vital need: ensuring that children are conceived by a mother and father committed to raising them in the stable conditions of a lifelong relationship. (5)
Religious Freedom
As a supporter of traditional marriage, I am deeply concerned about being able to continue to freely express my opinions, live my religion and teach my children in this confusing world. As Justice Alito states, “I assume that those who cling to old beliefs will be able to whisper their thoughts in the recesses of their homes, but if they repeat those views in public,      
they will risk being labeled as bigots
and treated as such by governments, employers, and schools. … By imposing its own views on the entire country, the majority facilitates the marginalization of the many Americans who have traditional ideas.” (6) I don’t want my children to be considered bigoted, made fun of, or excluded because of our family’s values. I don’t want them to be forced into saying or doing things we, as a family, don’t support. Nor do I want them to be indoctrinated by a “gay-agenda” which seems to be appearing in children’s movies, TV shows and other media.
Don’t Misunderstand
Please don’t misunderstand me. I do not condemn anyone with differing opinions. From the same document I quoted earlier, I also deeply believe, “ALL HUMAN BEINGS—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny.” (1) Every single person on this earth, or that has lived on this earth, or that will live on this earth is a child of God. You and I are both worthy of love and acceptance, regardless of political views, sexual orientation, or past sins. I do not wish to contend, simply express.
  
1- The Family: A Proclamation to the World, lds.org
3- Cathy Ruse, World Congress of Families

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts