Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

The Respect for Marriage Act currently before Congress would enforce not only the acceptance of same-sex unions, but also “marriages” with multiple partners. This would further erode the right of children to be raised by their mother and father in a stable, faithful long-term relationship.

“The essential public purpose of marriage is to connect mothers and fathers to their children and to one another,” said Ruth Institute President Dr Jennifer Roback Morse, PhD.

“All the stated purposes of the newly redefined concept of marriage are either private or inessential.”

“The Ruth Institute categorically opposes the cynically misnamed ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ (HR 8404). And we commend the more than 2,000 religious leaders who signed an open letter opposing this deceptive and dangerous same-sex marriage bill currently before Congress.”

Adult Predilections Before Children’s Rights

“Children need their parents,” Morse explained.

“All humans have a right to know the identity of the two people who brought them into life. And except for unavoidable tragedy, children have a right to be in relationship with both parents.”

“Removing a gender requirement for marriage undermines these basic human rights by redefining the social and legal understanding of parenthood. Redefining marriage was bad public policy in Obergefell v. Hodges in 2015, and it is bad public policy in HR 8404 today.”

Polygamy, Polyandry, and More

HR 8404 goes further than the 2015 ruling. Besides federal recognition of marriage between same-sex couples, it would require states to recognise any type of marriage, including of multiple partners.

“Thus, if a state decided to legalise polygamy, group marriage, marriage between blood relatives, or marriage between an adult and a minor, every other state and the federal government would be forced to recognise these unnatural unions,” Morse warned.

“The bill’s authors are postponing a Senate vote until after the election because they fear the political consequences. The Sexual Revolutionaries are playing to their radical base and hiding the radicalism of this bill from the people.”

More Legal Weaponisation

In their letter, the 2,000 religious leaders argued that the Respect for Marriage Act would, in effect, deputise anti-faith forces to sue individuals, churches, businesses and other organisations that refuse to bend a knee to newly created forms of “marriage.”

The Ruth Institute has consistently and resolutely opposed the redefinition of marriage. In part because of this, it has been on the Southern Poverty Law Center’s list of “hate groups” since 2013.

“After Obergefell, states began replacing ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ on marriage licenses with ‘spouse 1’ and ‘spouse 2,’” Morse noted. “The ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ would accelerate this trend by making marriage a free-form institution.”

“The radical redefinition of marriage is part of the movement to abolish marriage and the family,” Morse said. “Protecting these institutions, which are the bedrock of civilisation, is the most crucial issue of our time.”

___

Originally published at The Ruth Institute. Photo by Askar Abayev.