Biblical admonitions against homosexuality are written alongside condemnation of other sexual sins such as fornication and adultery. Since Jesus says lust is adultery, few can claim to have never indulged in sexual sin. There’s an important distinction between the individual homosexual sinner (we’re all sinners) and the homosexual agenda exemplified by the push for legalized same sex marriage. Mainstream media wants you to believe same sex marriage is a non-threatening civil rights issue. Not so. It poses a dramatic threat to our civil liberties and threatens the foundation and stability of our nation.

      The homosexual movement isn’t about economic equality; the push for same-sex marriage isn’t about marriage. Most homosexuals have above-average incomes, protection from job and housing discrimination, and access to civil unions with insurance and inheritance benefits. Their goal is approval of homosexuality as legally and socially equal to heterosexuality. They demand not just tolerance of homosexual conduct as private sexual behavior, but endorsement and celebration of it as a constitutional right. Ultimately, the objective is to radically redefine our foundational institutions of marriage and nuclear family. These goals, defined for decades, are currently being achieved by one of our most powerful and well funded political lobbies (annual budget over $50 million).

      Their methods: 1. Portraying homosexuals as disadvantaged victims in need of protection, while glamorizing and normalizing homosexual conduct. 2. Vilifying opposers of homosexuality as Nazis, Klansmen, hate-mongers, and generally backwards. 3. Playing down the sexually deviant behavior itself (repugnant to most people), saying homosexual rights are civil rights (embraced by most people), ignoring its infringement on others’ civil rights. 4. Silencing traditional views on human sexual morality and marriage by making them federal “hate crimes.”

      Why is it critical we protect traditional marriage? Primarily for the sake of children. Marriage is more than a contract for obligations, a legitimization of loving feelings or a means for self-fulfillment. It is not primarily a license to have sex, gain social recognition or insurance/property benefits. Civil unions achieve that. Marriage between a man and a woman is sacred and linked to the power of procreation. While governments did not invent marriage, they have historically shown a compelling interest in protecting traditional marriage. Why? Because it is essential for promoting children’s physical protection, social identity, training for responsible adulthood, defending them against adverse social influences, and for passing on traditions, morality and values necessary to preserve the stability of society. Recognizing this, married couples in almost every culture have been granted special benefits aimed at sustaining their relationships and promoting the optimal environment for children. The purpose is not to elevate them above others who may share a residence or relationship, but rather to preserve, protect and defend the critical institutions of marriage and family. Children are entitled to the optimal environment of birth to a father and mother committed and faithful to their marital vows. Children given to homosexual couples have little chance of a healthy, safe life or social acceptance.

      Recognition and protection of traditional marriage is backed by the US citizenry and their representatives. In 1996, President Bill Clinton signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defined marriage under federal law as between one man and one woman. The act passed the Senate by 85 to 14 and the House by 342 to 67. Most states have passed legislation similar to the DOMA. Massachusetts and California Supreme Courts are the only two that have gone the other direction and then by slim margins—4:3 in both cases, and the majority of Californians disagreed. More than two hundred years of US legal precedent, thousands of years of human experience, major world religions, studies of biology and psychology--all have backed traditional marriage and identified homosexuality as immoral and sexually deviant. Now a minority of citizenry, backed by a powerful lobby, plan to change the definition of marriage, the most fundamental institution of civilization.

      There are other consequences of declaring same sex marriage a civil right. It will bring a glut of government policies to prevent discrimination against same sex couples. We have already seen infringement on freedom of speech, with fines and loss of tax exempt status for religious leaders or organizations speaking against homosexuality. Catholic charities in Boston has stopped offering adoption services because it refused to adopt children to homosexuals. Pressure has been successfully placed on religious schools to provide married housing for same-sex couples, on religious facilities to allow same sex marriage celebrations, on Christian doctors to perform medical procedures that violate their consciences and on student religious organizations to include same sex couples in membership. Once they legally establish same-sex unions as equivalent to heterosexual marriages, the curriculum of public schools will support this claim by teaching marriage defined as a relation between any two adults. This is already occurring in thousands of public schools. Dissenting parent’s rights have been further violated disallowing them to remove their children from the classroom. In the absence of abuse or significant neglect, government does not have the constitutional right to intrude on families, landlords, business owners, forcing them under penalty of law to adopt a view of human sexuality counter to their religion. Such intrusions weaken individual families and the culture at large, making it more difficult to pass moral strength and purpose onto the next generation. Endorsement of same-sex marriage widens the cultural gap between marriage and parenthood. As a consequence, in countries where same-sex marriage has been legalized, out of wedlock births, non-married cohabitation, divorce and crime have skyrocketed. Our nation is in grave peril if we don’t stop this homosexual agenda that threatens our most fundamental liberties.

Annie Bukacek MD