Marriage: A Hill To Die On

by Robert Stacy McCain - April 6th, 2009

Some conservatives are wholly persuaded by the arguments of same-sex marriage advocates. Others, however, are merely unprincipled cowards and defeatists. Concerned about maintaining their intellectual prestige, some elitists on the Right do not wish to associate themselves with Bible-thumping evangelicals. Or, disparaging the likelihood of successful opposition, they advocate pre-emptive surrender rather than waging a fight that will put conservatism on the losing side of the issue.

Yet if the defense of traditional marriage -- an ancient and honorable institution -- is not a "hill worth dying on," what is? In every ballot-box fight to date, voters have supported the one-man, one-woman definition of marriage. As indicated by exit polls in California last fall, this is one issue where the conservative position is widely endorsed by black and Latino voters. Should such a potentially promising political development be abandoned?

This quick summary of conservatism's battle's since the 1960s is an important article. Where we find ourselves today is fighting for the existence of the "great experiment", the idea that a moral people could rule themselves without a king or royalty or upper class to guide the people. Amazingly, our enemy is trying to recreate the concept of an elite who are there to make sure the common man stays in his place by having the failures of our society outvote the productive middle class.

On issues of morality, there is never clarity. This idea that gay marriage is justified springs directly from the same people who believe that our Constitution is not a clear set of moral principles for the purpose of defending liberty. They see it as a living document. To them it is not a limit on government to maintain freedom, but a limit on one set of citizens to the benefit of other groups. The end result will be to allow judges to destroy our culture for the creation of another.

This ruling that gay marriage is Constitutionally mandated comes out at the same time a judge has just ruled that enemies who attack us on the battlefield have the protection of our Constitution. Enemies have recourse to sue our soldiers for taking them as prisoners of war on the battlefield, with a presumption that our soldiers are wrong. The presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court lies with our enemy.

The idea of "give them an inch and they will take a mile" is proven by the issues discussed above. Fail to stop the Democrats over the issue of gay marriage and you encourage them to destroy our ability to wage war. It is all part and parcel of the goal to destroy our way of life by destroying Christianity and our Constitution, inch by mile.