Search AFA

Gay Marriage and the Date Which Will Live in Infamy

Thursday, June 13, 2019 @ 12:36 PM Gay Marriage and the Date Which Will Live in Infamy ATTENTION: Major social media outlets are finding ways to block the conservative/evangelical viewpoint. Click here for daily electronic delivery of The Stand's Daily Digest - the day's top blogs from AFA.

Bryan Fischer Radio Host MORE

On June 26, 2015, the Supreme Court “legalized” “marriages” between people who engage in sexual perversion. 

The word is in italics because they are not “marriages” in any meaningful or substantive sense. Calling something by a different name does not make it so. Calling something a “pet rock” does not make it a “pet.” It remains a rock, and no amount of linguistic ingenuity will ever change that. 

The Obergefell decision that “legalized” gay marriage was an exercise in tyranny because no state was allowed to disagree. No state was permitted to restrict marriage to the definition given by Nature and Nature’s God, the union of one man and one woman. 

In the wake of Obergefell, those who believed in the historic and God-given understanding of human sexuality were immediately labeled as bigots and haters and became persona non-grata just about everywhere. The world was turned on its head. Light turned into darkness. That which was evil was called good and that which was good was called evil. 

Climbing our way out of this moral abyss will be the task of generations. Once the towering institution of natural marriage was destroyed, the crater that is left will take decades to fill. 

When it comes to marriage and the family, 6/26/15 is our 9/11. 

Not only was the Obergefell ruling tyrannical, but it was also utterly devoid of constitutionality. The Constitution makes no mention of marriage or homosexuality anywhere, whether you read it front to back, back to front, in Sanskrit, or upside down hanging from the rafters. 

The Founders gave no authority to the central government to define or redefine marriage at all. This means that, according to the 10th Amendment, this is an issue that is reserved exclusively and entirely for the states and their elected officials. Supreme Court justices, in our system of government, have nothing to do with it. 

In a just world, in which we were actually governed by the Constitution and not by meddlesome judges masquerading as legislators, the Obergefell ruling would simply be ignored, and states would go right on about the business of handling their own affairs when it comes to matters of the home and the family. 

Same-sex marriage would have little to no chance of widespread legal recognition if left to the people to whom it belongs, the elected representatives of the people at the state level. That’s why it has, almost without exception, been imposed on everybody by judicial fiat, beginning with Massachusetts’ Supreme Judicial Council back in 2004, aided and abetted by Gov. Mitt Romney who really should have known better. 

Thomas Jefferson reminded us eloquently in the Kentucky Resolutions that states created the federal government, not the other way round. The states are the master, the federal government is the servant. 

The book of Proverbs tells us that “under three things the earth trembles; under four it cannot bear up.” One of the four things that crush the earth is “a slave when he becomes king” (Proverbs 30:22). Supreme Court justices, constitutionally designed to be our servants, have instead become our tyrannical overlords. 

Most controversies can be resolved by returning to first principles. The first principles here are as follows: 

  1. “We the People” enacted the Constitution as the supreme law of the land.
  2. Since “all legislative powers” have been vested in Congress, according to Article I, it is constitutionally impossible for the Supreme Court to create the “law of the land.” The Court issues opinions; it does not create law.
  3. In the Constitution, “we the people” gave very limited powers of action to the central government in Article I, Section 8. If it’s not in there, the federal government has no authority to do it at all, and defining marriage is not in there.
  4. Since “we the people” gave no authority to the central government to define marriage, that power is reserved completely to the States and the people by the 10th Amendment.
  5. Therefore, Obergefell was as wrongly decided as Dred Scott was, and should be overturned or ignored as soon as humanly possible. 

Abraham Lincoln pointed out, in connection with Dred Scott, that “if the policy of the irrevocably the Supreme Court, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers.” 

Well, I don’t know exactly who is ruling us, but it’s clearly not we the people. As Thomas Jefferson put it, it’s time to bind the federal government down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. Marriage is as good a place as any to start.

Please Note: We moderate all reader comments, usually within 24 hours of posting (longer on weekends). Please limit your comment to 300 words or less and ensure it addresses the content. Comments that contain a link (URL), an inordinate number of words in ALL CAPS, rude remarks directed at the author or other readers, or profanity/vulgarity will not be approved.


Find us on social media for the latest updates.




P.O. Drawer 2440 Tupelo, Mississippi 38803 662-844-5036 FAQ@AFA.NET
Copyright ©2022 American Family Association. All rights reserved.