A federal judge in Utah
has struck down part of that state's law banning polygamy, after a lawsuit was
brought by the stars of the television reality series “Sister Wives.” [polygamy
n. a marriage in which a spouse of either sex may have more than one mate at
the same time]
Last week’s ruling by
U.S. District Court Judge Clark Waddoups threw out the Utah State law's section
prohibiting “cohabitation,” … saying it violates constitutional guarantees of
due process and religious freedom. But
the judge said he would keep in place the ban on bigamy. [bigamy
n. the fraudulent or otherwise impermissible act of entering into a marriage
with one person while still legally married to another]
The 91-page decision
comes months after the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a separate federal law (the
1996 Defense of Marriage Act) that defined marriage as between only one
man and one woman … a major legal, political, and social victory for
homosexual couples seeking recognition of their same-sex unions.
The current suit (Brown v. Buhman) was brought 2-years ago
by Kody Brown, a Utah resident and his four wives (Meri, Janelle, Christine,
and Robyn) who together have 17-children. Their lives are chronicled on the TLC cable television program – “Sister
Wives.” They claim their privacy rights
were being violated by the decades-old law, passed around the time Utah became
a state. They are members of a fundamentalist
branch of the Mormon Church known as the Apostolic United Brethren Church.
Brown and his family
said in a statement they were grateful for the ruling. “Many people do not approve of plural
families,” he said, but “we hope that in time all of our neighbors and fellow
citizens will come to respect our own choices as part of this wonderful country
of different faiths and beliefs.”
There was no initial
reaction to the ruling from Utah officials, but they are expected to appeal.
Some religious groups
criticized the ruling. “This is what
happens when marriage becomes about the emotional and sexual wants of adults,
divorced from the needs of children for a mother and a father committed to each
other for life,” said Russell Moore, of the Southern Baptist Convention. “Polygamy was outlawed in this country
because it was demonstrated, again and again, to hurt women and children. Sadly, when marriage is elastic enough to mean
anything, in due time it comes to mean nothing.”
It is an indisputable
fact that the Bible defines marriage as between one man and one woman (Genesis
1-2); and that after “the fall” of humanity into the realm of evil’s sin, God
temporarily allowed polygamy to occur … without giving it any explicit moral
approval. Jesus [God incarnate] came to
clearly state (Matthew 19:3-6) the essence of marriage as established by God “who created them from the beginning”
and “made them male and female” and
also said that “a man shall … hold fast
to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.” He also affirmed that marriage is therefore
an institution God creates between a man and a woman, because He calls marriage
a relationship between two people whom “God
has joined together.”
Civil government has a
moral responsibility to define and regulate marriage in keeping with the
Creator of the institution. It is the
bedrock of any stable society. To do
otherwise is to further send this nation down the slippery slope where others
will argue for a woman’s right to marry her son or a man his daughter or a man
his sister … if that is their desire and preference. [We’ve already started down this trail with
the recognition of homosexual ‘marriage.’]
This was the fundamental
question at stake in the Mormon polygamy controversy from about 1845-1895. Although Utah territory, which was dominated
by Mormons, applied for statehood seven times (beginning in 1849), the U.S.
Congress did not permit it to become a state until 1896 … only after Utah
finally agreed to insert a ban on polygamy in the state constitution. Thus the government imposed a condition to
statehood within the U.S. – a national standard for defining marriage.
This Brown v. Buhman lawsuit is about people who
are not just claiming a ‘private right’ for themselves, but are demanding a
right to change the definition of marriage that has been long-standing in our
society. A marriage amendment to the
U.S. Constitution would be the most effective way to establish a uniform
understanding of marriage once again in America.
It’s hard to overstate
the importance of laws concerning traditional marriage. The future of the nation’s children depends
in large measure on how we define marriage and whether we continue to encourage
and protect it. The future lives of
millions of men and women in society will be affected by the way in which we
define marriage. It is the foundational
institution in our society, and it affects everything else. The battle to
preserve Godly marriage must be waged and won on many fronts. We must be aware of incremental steps
designed to weaken the institution of marriage.
As we have come to see, one incremental advance by the same-sex marriage
movement will only lead to another (e.g., polygamous unions, polyamorous
unions) and before long, homosexual marriage will seem like only a small
step. We must draw a line in the sand
…because without a Spirit-led revival it will be difficult to turn back.
Rev.
Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.
Chaplain
(Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army
Pastor,
Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel
No comments:
Post a Comment