Skip to comments.Marriage Protection Amendment: The Consequences of Failure
Posted on 05/21/2006 6:30:51 PM PDT by sionnsar
MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT (MPA)
By Matt Daniels
Senate Joint Resolution 1 in the 109th Congress
THE CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE
I. LEGAL CONSEQUENCES
Invalidation of all state marriage amendments (Nebraska amendment invalidated in federal court)
Invalidation of over 1,000 federal laws concerning welfare, education, immigration, taxation, the armed forces, federal benefits, loan programs, and other policy areas (General Accounting Office Report prepared for Senator Frist)
Invalidation of thousands of state laws -- for every state in the nation -- concerning welfare, education, taxation, state benefits programs, and many other substantive state policy areas.
II. CONSEQUENCES FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION
Curricula in all public schools equating opposition to same-sex "marriage" to bigotry and racism
The Canadian Supreme Court ordered the largest school district in the country to accept kindergarten level books promoting same-sex marriage.
A British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal is now hearing a case designed to require a "gay marriage" curriculum requirement in every Canadian public school.
National Public Radio reports that the Massachusetts Supreme Court decision legalizing same-sex marriage has led to teachers promoting same-sex marriage in public school classrooms.
The California State Assembly has proposed legislation (AB 1056) that would require the State Board of Education to integrate "tolerance instruction" pertaining to homosexual unions and relationships into curricula at every level.
Sanctions against schools, teachers and parents who object to same-sex "marriage" curricula
The British Columbia Supreme Court upheld disciplinary action against a counselor and teacher for writing letters to the local newspaper denouncing the school's teaching on homosexual marriage.
A Canadian pastor and parent who wrote a letter to the editor questioning the promotion of homosexuality in public schools was charged with discrimination under the Alberta Human Rights act.
Proposed legislation in California would repeal current law that prevents homosexual, bisexual, and transsexual curriculum from being forced on school districts (AB 606) and requires tolerance training for same-sex unions and relationships (AB 1056).
A Massachusetts parent spent a night in jail for civil disobedience when he refused to leave a school board meeting. His request was that the school inform him when same-sex marriage would be discussed and that his "child be removed from class whenever such subjects arise.'" (Portland Press Herald [Maine])
III. CONSEQUENCES FOR PRIVATE EDUCATION
Loss of tax exempt status
If the courts declare discrimination against same-sex "marriage" the equivalent of racial discrimination, most legal scholars believe the Internal Revenue Service will deny federal tax-exempt status for private schools and universities failing to recognize same sex marriages.
Loss of faith-based values and character of religious private schools.
The Ontario Supreme Court forced a school to allow a student and his male partner to attend the graduation prom, even though the church-run school has prohibitions against homosexual behavior.
In July 2001, New York state's highest court allowed two lesbians to sue Yeshiva University, a private Orthodox Jewish college, under the state's human rights law claiming the school's housing policy for married couples discriminates against same-sex couples. (New York Times)
California law requires sports teams of religious private schools to adopt antidiscrimination policies for sexual orientation or face the prospect of being barred from competition.
Loss of accreditation for religious private schools that adhere to faith-based values
The College of Teachers denied approval of a teachers training program at Trinity Western University, a private Christian University in British Columbia, because the university requires all students to sign a pledge that they will not engage certain forms of sexual conduct -- including homosexual behavior.
IV. CONSEQUENCES FOR RELIGIOUS FREEDOM
Suppression of religious speech
In 2004, the Canadian Customs and Revenue Agency asked a Catholic Bishop to remove a pastoral letter on marriage from the diocesan website or risk losing the diocese's income tax-exempt status.
Pennsylvania law prohibiting 'harassment by communication' means that prosecutions could be based on speech reflecting perceived 'animus' against homosexuality, such as preaching against gay marriage." (The National Law Journal, Anthony R. Picarello, Jr.)
The Internal Revenue Service has been asked to revoke the tax-exempt status of the Catholic Diocese of Colorado Springs because its bishop recently taught that same-sex marriage is 'intrinsically evil,' and that this value should influence Catholics' political choices.
A Montana gay rights group similarly complained to the state's Commission of Political Practices against a Baptist church because it showed congregants a video that advocated against same-sex marriage and urged them to petition for a state constitutional amendment supporting traditional marriage." (The National Law Journal, Anthony R. Picarello, Jr.)
Groups such as Focus on the Family and other Evangelical and Catholic organizations are not allowed to broadcast on Canadian radio or television due to their support for traditional marriage.
Suppression of religious free exercise
The Alberta Human Rights Commission brought charges against Bishop Fred Henry for a letter to his parish expressing the Catholic view of the sacrament of marriage and condemning the concept of "same-sex marriage."
Swedish Pastor Ake Green was sentenced to one month in prison for a sermon he preached to his congregation against homosexual conduct based on his interpretation of the Bible. (The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty)
Suppression of religious values in the non-profit sector. As a condition for receiving government funding for homeless shelters and other programs serving the poor, Catholic Charities of San Francisco was forced to violate Catholic teaching and grant "domestic partner benefits" for gay and lesbian employees claiming the equivalent of marital status.
A government-funded Retired and Senior Volunteer Program refused to place volunteers at the Central Baptist Hospital (Lexington, KY) because the hospital would not sign a contract agreeing to comply with the city's "Fairness" ordinance, which included sexual orientation. (Associated Press)
In Boy Scouts v. Dale, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Boy Scouts' First Amendment right to exclude openly gay men from leadership, yet scouts have been excluded from a charitable-giving payroll-deduction program in Connecticut and from free access to public mooring in Berkeley, CA. Similar measures to exclude churches and other religious institutions are close behind." (The National Law Journal, Anthony R. Picarello, Jr.)
Suppression of religious values in private sector
Scott Brockie, the owner of a printing company, refused to provide printing services to the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives on the basis that the cause of homosexuality was offensive to his religious beliefs. The Ontario Human Rights Commission fined Brockie for discrimination under the Ontario Human Rights Code.
Ron Brown was rejected for a coaching job at Stanford University because of his Christian beliefs. He had expressed orthodox Christian views of homosexual conduct on a Christian radio program in 1999. (Lincoln Daily Nebraskan)
Denial of freedom of association
The Knights of Columbus in British Columbia have been taken to the Human Rights Tribunal for refusing to allow their hall to be used for a lesbian "wedding" reception.
A Mennonite Church camp is before the Manitoba Human Rights Commission for canceling a weekend booked by a homosexual choir. The Mennonites cancelled the booking citing that their faith, mission statement and code of conduct conflicted with the choir's purpose.
Denial of government employment.
Marriage commissioners in Canada have been forced to resign unless they comply with the recent laws legalizing same sex marriage. No exemptions have been made on the basis of freedom of conscience.
San Francisco Mayor Frank Jordan fired the Reverend Eugene Lumpkin from the city's Human Rights Commission in 1993 because of his views on homosexuality. "It didn't matter that no one could point to any discriminatory act on Lumpkin's part. What he thought was his crime." (San Francisco Chronicle, February 23, 2004)
V. SOCIAL CONSEQUENCES
Marriage will be devalued as a legal, social and cultural institution resulting in more children born out-of-wedlock and raised without the benefit of a mother and a father
"More than a decade into post-gay marriage Scandinavia, out-of-wedlock birthrates have passed 50 percent, and the effective end of marriage as a protective shield for children has become thinkable.
Gay marriage hasn't blocked the separation of marriage and parenthood; it has advanced it." (Stanley Kurtz, "The End of Marriage in Scandinavia," The Weekly Standard, February 2, 2004)
Increases in youth crime, child poverty, teen pregnancy and welfare dependence statistically track more closely with family breakdown than any other variable including race or economics.
---Matt Daniels is president of Alliance for Marriage
IMO, this belongs in News/Activism. June is upon us.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.