Gay Marriage in Massachusetts
Commentary by Steve Yuhas
May 18, 2004

Officials in Cambridge, Massachusetts were so excited over the prospect of degrading the institution of marriage that they opened promptly at midnight to issue the first marriage licenses in the United States and the vast majority of the world to same sex couples.

Monday, May 17, 2004 will forever be remembered as the day marriage became an anything goes proposition that takes the most stable institution ever known to mankind and turns it into a pagan ritual akin to something from Stonehenge.  Two men, two women or a man and a woman can now legally marry in the Bay State and gays are lining up to fan out across the nation to challenge marriage laws across the nation.

Right thinking people have got to be scratching their heads wondering how the Supreme Judicial Court that had never before found gay marriage constitutional suddenly woke up and decided that it was.  One can only imagine what they will next find in the document that doesn’t mention marriage as an institution, but one thing is certain: the perversion of America begins with activist judges dismantling the stable framework of this country.

Some will argue that allowing gays to marry should be a decision left up to the states, and with those people I certainly agree.  Unfortunately, it will only be a matter of weeks before a liberal activist federal judge finds within the United States Constitution the fact that gay marriage has to be recognized across state lines.  Arguments will be made by both sides, but with liberal judges hell bent on changing America into a secular European style democracy even Las Vegas will be putting money on the fact that gay marriage will soon spread across the country.

Few things are as important as the ability for society in a state to define the norms and laws of their own state.  Gay marriage in Massachusetts, an activity that is legal not because the people or their representatives decided it would be legal, rather because four out of seven judges decided it would be, should not be permitted to be forced on the rest of the nation any more than the legal registration of automobiles.

Consider that when one moves from, say, Florida to California that the legal registration for automobiles are not valid in one state from the other, nor are licenses to drive the vehicle.  If one moves from Florida to California one must relinquish the registration in one state in order to permanently reside in the other – that same premise should hold true with respect to gay marriage.

If the institution of marriage is not a solemn and superior institution so that it can be changed at will to include couple, threesomes, or any other concoction of humanity, then those entering into the contract should be considered along the same line as vehicles and licenses to drive.

Gay activists will say that gay marriage is a fundamental right of equality and that being allowed to enter into the contract makes them full class citizens.  Alright, but when they’re asked about three people entering into marriage or a son and his daughter being permitted to marry, they come up with a convoluted excuse as to why they cannot.  Surely gays don’t want to deny this most fundamental of rights on other alternative lifestyles, but they do because they want to normalize the union of two gay people while pretending that the corruption of that marriage does nothing to harm the union of those who have entered into the institution for the last six thousand years.

There is no reason for gays to marry.  Gay people don’t even know how to date each other with monogamy, let alone enter into a union whose sole purpose is to provide stability to society and to raise children.  Gays cannot procreate and cannot do anything for society by being recognized as a legal union so their endeavor is pointless, but dangerous as society bends over backwards to reward their futile coupling.

It seems that the bell for gay marriage has been rung and there is no way to un-ring it, but the rest of the country should fight like hell to make sure that the wishes of one judge in Massachusetts is not forced on the rest of society and the United States Supreme Court should be structured to make certain that when this case reaches it that there are right thinking justices on it to decide the matter once and for all.

Courage of conviction is important and politicians should be held to account.  Today marks the day marriage became a carnival act with two grooms prancing down the aisle in dresses and two women on motorcycles going to city hall to pronounce their commitment for one another dressed in leather.

Marriage may have been perverted in Massachusetts, but it is up to the rest of us to make certain that marriage remains a serious institution instead of a deprived act of playing house for people who cannot fulfill the purpose of this previously solemn institution.