In re Marriage Cases, 43 Cal.4th 757, 183 P.3d 384 (Cal.,2008)
http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S147999.PDF
One very important fact; this controversy is not about "rights" or privileges! It is about labels and perceptions. As the California Court notes at page 42 of its decision:
"...nonetheless (by virtue of the explicit provisions of the Domestic Partner Act) under the current governing California statute, registered domestic partners generally “have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and [are] subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law . . . as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.”
In other words, we aren't concerned about some kind of discrimination in "rights, protections, and benefits" we are concerned about image and attitude. Underlying this evident concern about attitude and image is the desire and goal to change the concept of marriage to allow any perversion of the concept of marriage to be included within the definition. However, as the Devine Institution of Marriage states:
"We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children . . . The family is ordained of God. Marriage between man and woman is essential to His eternal plan. Children are entitled to birth within the bonds of matrimony, and to be reared by a father and a mother who honor marital vows with complete fidelity."
The efforts to undermine the definition of marriage, no matter how motivated, have the effect of attempting to frustrate and attack the "Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children." Although the California Court would compartmentalize the secular or civil nature of marriage from the religious nature of the relationship, it cannot be done. There are some things that are fundamental and eternal and cannot be altered merely by changing a label.
As the Divine Institution of Marriage goes on to elaborate:
"Marriage between a man and a woman is central to the plan of salvation. The sacred nature of marriage is closely linked to the power of procreation. Only a man and a woman together have the natural biological capacity to conceive children. This power of procreation – to create life and bring God’s spirit children into the world – is sacred and precious. Misuse of this power undermines the institution of the family and thereby weakens the social fabric."
The passage of the Arizona (and California and Florida) marriage amendments is central to an effort to preserve the core values of our society, our faith and our families.
More later.
And now I desire that this inequality should be no more in this land, especially among this my people; but I desire that this land be a land of liberty, and every man may enjoy his rights and privileges alike, so long as the Lord sees fit that we may live and inherit the land, yea, even as long as any of our posterity remains upon the face of the land. Mosiah 29:32
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What is fraud from a legal perspective
Lately, the news has been full of references to "fraud." As a retired trial attorney, from time to time, I had to deal with clie...
-
The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life has published " A Portrait of Mormons in the U.S. " After studying some of the responses...
-
The recent Iowa Supreme Court opinion in the case of Varnum v. Brien filed April 3, 2009 is a classic study in politics and how judges can...
-
One of the challenges of living in Utah Valley is the nearly constant disregard for traffic control devices including red lights. For tho...
No comments:
Post a Comment