The Threat to Marriage and Democracy in the 21st Century

For centuries, societies all over the world have held the definition that Marriage is the union between a man and a Woman.  Marriage creates a foundation from which society is built.  This union allows sexual relations from which procreation can occur, in a closed relationship, and encourages both the man and the woman to stay together in the raising of their children. 

In the Supreme Court ruling Obergfell v. Hodges it states, “By bestowing a respected status and material benefits on married couples, society encourages men and women to conduct sexual relations within marriage rather than without. As one prominent scholar put it, “Marriage is a socially arranged solution for the problem of getting people to stay together and care for children that the mere desire for children, and the sex that makes children possible, does not solve.” J. Q. Wilson, The Marriage Problem 41 (2002).”

Each states constitution is responsible for defining marriage in that state.  Over the past 2 decades, state after state has voted on how to define marriage.  The majority of the people voted to define marriage as a union between a man and woman. 

Yet, the Supreme Court took away the people’s democratic voice by ruling against the majority to redefine marriage. 

Justice Roberts states in dissent, “Allowing unelected federal judges to select which unenumerated rights rank as “fundamental”—and to strike down state laws on the basis of that determination—raises obvious concerns about the judicial role.” 

The question then is not, ‘Is marriage a fundamental right?’, the question is, ‘Does the Supreme Court have the right to disregard the democratic process upon which our country is founded?’.

Further thought and consideration of the topic, lends me to believe that the ultimate goal of the Gay Community is social acceptance.  When the Judges bypassed the people in creating social change, they undermined the Gay Community’s goal of social acceptance.  We now have a law that the majority of the people do not agree with.  If the Judges had not made this ruling, and in a few more years the people voted again, I believe it would likely have passed.  Now instead, we have set in motion consequences that will have far reaching effects by not allowing the people to change, and giving the Judicial Branch more power that it is supposed to have.