  
Vermont & Same-Sex Unions: The Ongoing Controversy
By Chuck Colson
Breakpoint Commentary #91222 - 12/22/99
By now you've heard the jubilant cries from the gay-
rights activists over the victory they have won in
Vermont. That state's Supreme Court has ruled that
treating homosexual couples differently than
heterosexual couples violates the Vermont
constitution's guarantee of equal treatment. The
court dumped this hot potato in the lap of the
legislature to decide what to do.
Well, it's a Hobson's choice. The legislature can
either extend the definition of marriage to include
same-sex marriage, or it can adopt the most sweeping
domestic partnership law in the nation.
Gay rights advocates are lobbying the Vermont
legislature to alter the meaning of "marriage."
That's because a domestic partnership law
wouldn't affect benefits provided by the Federal
government or private employers-it would only
provide state benefits.
More importantly, if the legislature chooses
marriage, it's possible, under the U.S.
Constitution's "Full Faith and Credit" clause, that a
couple married in Vermont could force other states to
recognize their union. So gay couples will flock to
Vermont.
This prospect is why, in 1996, Congress enacted the
Defense of Marriage Act, which relieves states of the
obligation to recognize same-sex unions performed in
other states. This prospect has also prompted thirty
states to adopt their own defense of marriage acts.
But even if Vermont opts only for a domestic
partnership law, the traditional understanding of
marriage is imperiled. That's because this decision,
like previous decisions in Hawaii and Canada, treats
marriage as nothing more than a status that qualifies
people for government benefits. It essentially
deconstructs marriage.
So the legislators in Vermont have been left with an
excruciating decision. They can either recognize
"same-sex marriage," abandoning what has
been the historic position of civilized societies
through the ages, or they can simply redefine marriage.
What can Christians and right-thinking moral
conservatives do? If your state hasn't adopted it's
own Defense of Marriage Act, you can urge your state
representatives to adopt one. The sooner the better.
Christians and moral conservatives need to argue our
Case very well. Christians in particular are
stereotyped every time they oppose the gay agenda -
we're called homophobic. That's pure nonsense. I visit
prisons all over the country and embrace men dying
with AIDS. We care deeply about homosexuals, and know
that God loves them as He loves every one of us - a
point we have to make very clearly.
So Christians, and conservatives in general, who care
about preserving the best moral traditions of our
society, have to point out why all societies have
revered and protected marriage. It's the institution
that civilizes and protects children. It's society's
most basic institution.
My friend Bill Bennett made this case brilliantly in an
op-ed piece in The Washington Post a couple of years
ago. I hope you'll call us here at BreakPoint so we can
send you a copy of Bill's article, along with other
some other material. Thanks to Vermont, this debate will
rage across the country; we need to be in the vanguard
of persuading our friends and neighbors why the
traditional view of the family is essential to society.
As we approach the new millennium, nothing less than
the survival of our own civilized culture is as
stake.
Copyright 1999 Prison Fellowship. Found on the Web at
Breakpoint with Chuck Colson. Used by permission.
Email this to a friend
copyright
© 1995-2008
Leadership U. All rights reserved.
Updated: 13 July 2002
|