By Bob Marshall | Guest Columnist
UPDATED: December 28, 2024 at 6:07 PM EST
As the chief House of Delegates sponsor of the 2006 voter approved “one-man, one-woman” marriage amendment to Virginia’s Constitution, I want to alert your readers to Democratic efforts to take the initial step to repeal that amendment in the first week of the 2025 General Assembly.
The Marshall-Newman marriage amendment provides, “That only a union between one man and one woman may be a marriage valid in or recognized by this Commonwealth and its political subdivisions …” Further, no other association of persons could be, “… assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.”
Virginia’s marriage amendment received 1,328,537 “yes” votes, to 999,687 “no” votes. This 57% pro-traditional marriage majority out-polled U.S. Senate candidates Democrat Jim Webb’s 1,175,606 votes and Republican George Allen’s 1,166,277 votes.
We are in this quandary because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 in Obergefel vs. Hodges (June 26, 2015) that the 14th Amendment requires states to issue marriage licenses to two persons of the same sex and recognize same-sex marriages from other states.
But as long as the one man, one woman marriage amendment stays in Virginia’s Constitution, its enforcement is suspended until either repealed by Virginia voters at a general election or the Supreme Court reverses itself.
To undo the effects of the 2006 marriage vote, Democrats introduced House Resolution 9, which would abolish the traditional definition of marriage voters put into our Constitution, but fail to replace it with another definition.
While odd, the 2015 Obergefel decision striking down the traditional one-man, one-woman marriage standard of roughly 40 states also had no marriage definition.
Chief Justice John Roberts’ Obergefel dissent noted that:
- “… petitioners conceding that they are not aware of any society that permitted same-sex marriage before 2001;”
- “It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage;”
- The majority justices, “portray everyone who does not share the majority’s ‘better informed understanding’ as bigoted.”
The Democrats’ anti-marriage proposal states Virginia may not, “deny the issuance of a marriage license to two adult persons seeking a lawful marriage on the basis of the sex, gender, or race of such persons.”
Democrats also want the following language removed from Virginia’s present marriage amendment: “ … assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.” Apparently Democrats can’t think of any benefits or rights, etc., relating to one-man, one-woman marriage.
The Marriage and Religion Institute notes, “Marriage is the foundational relationship for all of society. All other relationships in society stem from the father-mother relationship, and these other relationships thrive most if that father-mother relationship is simultaneously a close and a closed husband-wife relationship.” MRI catalogues 164 practical individual and social benefits from natural marriage.
The Democrats’ marriage repeal amendment has no conscience or religious exemption protecting clerics or members of religious denominations, business owners and others with moral or ethical objections from having to support, endorse, recognize or participate in, contract for, provide professional services or publicly recognize what “woke” ideology or social fashion calls marriage.
Roberts noted in Obergefel that not providing a religious or similar exemption will cause problems for persons of faith, such as, “ … when … a religious college provides married student housing only to opposite-sex married couples, or a religious adoption agency declines to place children with same-sex married couples. Indeed, the Solicitor General candidly acknowledged that the tax exemptions of some religious institutions would be in question if they opposed same-sex marriage.”
And the Democrats’ marriage repeal amendment puts the word “gender” into Virginia’s Constitution. But making gender an aspect of fundamental rights could adversely impact women’s and girls’ sports and privacy; broaden sexual harassment liability; eradicate parental consent over preventing schools or other third parties from providing sex change drugs/surgery; affect school books and much more.
Tell your delegate and senator to reject HR9.
Former Del. Bob Marshall served 26 years in the General Assembly, representing Manassas Park and parts of Prince William and Loudoun counties.
Originally Published: December 28, 2024 at 6:05 PM EST
https://www.pilotonline.com/2024/12/28/column-democrats-take-aim-at-virginias-marriage-amendment/
