Cultural Revolutions

Civil Unions

Civil unions, which offer same-sex couples the privileges that presently accrue to those who have been united in normal marriages, have been discussed by several legislators since the MassachusettsSupreme Judiciary Court ordered the state legislature to establish “homosexual marriage.”  The Massachusetts high court, under the dynamic (demonic?) leadership of Chief Justice Margaret Marshall, decreed that such a halfway covenant is totally incompatible with its understanding of the state constitution.  Civil unions would relegate homosexuals to the category of second-class citizens.  According to the court, opposition could result only from “residual personal prejudices,” such as those that have so often been held against other marginalized groups.  If anyone says, “But the Bible forbids this,” the answer would certainly be: “Believing the Bible is a residual personal prejudice.”

In decreeing that civil unions are no substitute for real marriage, Justice Marshall and her court have done us a favor.  The temptation, already expressed by a number of “conservative” writers—including some who favor a constitutional amendment—to compromise by creating civil unions, granting homosexual couples the financial and other benefits they desire but protecting the word marriage, is simply a way, shall we say, to praise by faint damns homosexual...

Join now to access the full article and gain access to other exclusive features.

Get Started

Already a member? Sign in here

X