The consequences of same-sex ‘marriage’ will be far reaching
Don Wildmon
Founder of AFA/AFR

April 2004 – Harvard University was founded to educate clergy. The people who founded it didn’t want uneducated ministers leading the flock. It has strayed a long way from its original purpose, but occasionally something good still does come out of America’s most prestigious university.

Mary Ann Glendon is the Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard. Recently she wrote an op-ed piece for the Wall Street Journal. She made some telling observations concerning homosexual “marriage.”

She said that while Massachusetts “is cutting back on programs to aid the elderly, the disabled, and children in poor families,” four judges “ruled in favor of special benefits for a group of relatively affluent households, most of which have two earners and are not raising children.” 

She wrote, “What same-sex marriage advocates have tried to present as a civil rights issue is really a bid for special preferences of the type our society gives to married couples for the very good reason that most of them are raising or have raised children.” We need to remember that homosexuals don’t reproduce, they recruit. 

She says the media has neglected “the economic and social costs of this radical social experiment. Astonishingly, in the media coverage of this issue, next to nothing has been said about what this new special preference would cost the rest of society in terms of taxes and insurances premiums.” The costs will be staggering. Canada, which has legalized homosexual marriage, has been considering this issue and has concluded that retroactive social-security survivor benefits alone would cost hundreds of millions of dollars. 

“Same-sex marriage,” she wrote, “will constitute a public, official endorsement of the following extraordinary claims made by the Massachusetts judges in the Goodridge case: that marriage is mainly an arrangement for the benefit of adults; that children do not need both a mother and a father; and that alternative family forms are just as good as a husband and wife raising kids together.” 

She also warned that religious freedom is at stake. “Gay-marriage proponents use the language of openness, tolerance, and diversity, yet one foreseeable effect of their success will be to usher in an era of intolerance and discrimination the likes of which we have rarely seen before. Every person and every religion that disagrees will be labeled as bigoted and openly discriminated against. The ax will fall most heavily on religious persons and groups that don’t go along.” 

Homosexual marriage goes against the “laws of nature and nature’s God.” Every time you go against that law you pay. The problem is that by the time we admit that we have gone against the “laws of nature and nature’s God,” the damage has already been done.  undefined