By Sarah Holliday
The Washington Stand
On June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges to strike down all state bans on same-sex marriage, effectively legalizing it in all 50 states. The left-wing Human Rights Campaign described this decision, which was decided in a very slim majority, as the moment “full marriage equality finally arrived.” Others, however, saw it as the beginning of a mountain of political and societal woes.
For Christians, in particular, same-sex marriage is a clear example of rebellion against creation order. But countless conservatives have also acknowledged the fact that same-sex marriage goes against what makes sense for the institution of marriage. As Abby Johnson put it, “A kid having ‘two moms’ or ‘two dads’ is not the same as God’s natural order of a child having a mom and dad. You can’t replace God’s plan with something counterfeit.”
The Obergefell decision has been in place for nearly a decade now. And while no serious movement to overturn it has been successful, an effort is, indeed, still being made. In fact, just this week, the Idaho House of Representatives passed a petition that “calls upon the Supreme Court of the United States to reverse the decision in Obergefell v. Hodges and restore the natural definition of marriage, a union of one man and one woman.”
The House Joint Memorial 1 was introduced earlier this month sponsored by state Rep. Heather Scott (R). It passed with a 46-24 vote and, not surprisingly, had no Democratic support. On Obergefell, Scott stated that SCOTUS “claimed to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, and it confused marriage laws and constitutions across the country.” She added that “this same Supreme Court used this same reasoning to make its decision for a right to privacy on Roe v. Wade, and that’s how they justified abortion, which, as we know, was overturned 50 years later.”
What both these cases point to is that “the federal government does not have the authority to just create rights out of thin air,” Scott emphasized. In a comment to The Washington Stand, Family Research Council’s David Closson, who serves as the director of the Center for Biblical Worldview, also weighed in on the issue. “When the Obergefell decision was imposed,” he said, “social conservatives immediately cried foul.” Similar to Scott, Closson contended that “the majority of justices, spearheaded by Justice Anthony Kennedy, made up a right to same-sex marriage out of whole cloth.” And it was former Justice Antonin Scalia who, “in his descent, referred to the legal reasoning of the court as analogous to the mystical aphorisms of the fortune cookie.”
Now, “10 years later, the legal reasoning of the Obergefell decision stands on even weaker ground.” According to Closson, “Christians understand marriage to be a pre-political institution. There is a reason that for millennia, civilizations recognized marriage as the relationship between one man and one woman. It is only recently within the span of human history that same-sex marriage would be even plausible.” And while Closson does not believe Obergefell will be overturned, he did emphasize how “it is important for Christians to continue making the argument that the institution of marriage is reserved for one man and one woman. It is still the case, regardless of Supreme Court precedent.”
Regardless of where Idaho’s petition goes, Closson stated, “I commend Idaho’s political leaders for passing the resolution and urging the Supreme Court to reverse its decision in Obergefell. Christians especially, Closson urged, “should strive for a world where our laws align with reality. And the reality is that same-sex marriage is a fiction; same-sex marriage is not a legitimate arrangement that Christians can recognize, and the Bible could not be any clearer on God’s purpose and design for marriage.”
For Christians and conservatives pushing back against all forms of LGBT-related activism, it’s clear that any opposition is subject to severe scrutiny from the other side. We’re labeled “bigoted” and “hateful” for working to maintain creation order in public policy, and that will continue to be the case. In fact, Closson expects that this more specific push to overturn Obergefell will “undoubtably [be met with] the progressive secular world who look at efforts like these as motivated by bigotry and vitriol.”
Even so, Closson concluded, “It will be important for Christians to articulate an apologetic for marriage and why the biblical understanding of marriage that, coincidentally, was understood for 6,000 years, is actually what contributes to true human flourishing.”
Originally published at The Washington Stand!
