Why a Federal Marriage Amendment is Needed

Here is an article from Concerned Women for America, pointing out judicial actions that are affecting our lives and our beliefs in marriage:

Mutual Respect

"Many commentators have noted the apparent irony: The Pope suggests Islam encourages violence-and Muslims riot in protest... Many commentators are missing the point: These protestors-and those who incite them-are not asking for mutual respect and equality. They are not saying: 'It's wrong to speak ill of a religion.' They are saying: 'It's wrong to speak ill of our religion.' They are not standing up for a principle. They are laying down the law. They are making it as clear as they can that they will not tolerate 'infidels' criticizing Muslims. They also are making it clear that infidels should expect criticism-and much worse-from Muslims. They are attempting nothing less than the establishment of a new world order in which the supremacy of what they call the Nation of Islam is acknowledged, and 'unbelievers' submit-or die." -Clifford May

Respect

“Sadly, the tentacles of radical feminist thought are poisoning the image of groups of males in different ways. If you watch a few commercials or sit-coms, you’ll see that dads are sloppy dolts who are always the last to know anything. Where’s the outrage? If you listen to the often foul and violent rap and hip-hop music of today, you’ll hear that young black and Hispanic men are hate-filled, selfish bigots who degrade women for fun. Where’s the outrage? If you’re a father-to-be, your pre-born baby can be legally killed without your knowledge, much less your consent. For crying out loud, where is the outrage? There are consequences when we, as a society, tolerate the constant images of males of any race as knuckle-dragging Neanderthals. When the media portrays fathers and grown men as sots, we rob our boys of the role models they need—of the role models we all need... Please go out of your way to validate the value of the decent fathers, husbands and young men in your life. I think you’ll be surprised, as I was, to find out how much they long for a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T.”
Rebecca Hagelin

Family

“Writer Leslie Bennetts charges that women who step-back from working are taking an extreme economic risk... Yet if off-ramping is the dangerous ‘high-stakes gamble’ Bennetts and her supporters claim, why are so many smart, rational women laying their money and their futures on the table? Perhaps because even a cursory look at hard data (rather than the collection of sad stories Bennetts has put forth) indicates that, statistically, there is very little to fear from making motherhood a career choice... According to work-first feminists, the scariest bogeyman looming over women who stay home is divorce. Men leave their wives high and dry all the time, she insists. In fact, they don’t. Women initiate about two-thirds of divorces... The statistics are also favorable for stay-at-home mothers in general. During the 90s, stay-at-home wives were 40 percent less likely to get divorced than their working counterparts. A 2004 study in the Journal of Marriage and Family revealed that couples have a much greater chance of splitting when the husband and wife earn equal incomes than when one partner is the primary breadwinner. When the higher-earning partner does leave, it is most often the wife... Taken all together, this makes the average middleclass husband seem about as much of a financial risk as a blue-chip stock.” —Megan Basham 

Family

“Nobody ever said being a parent is easy. But do politicians have to make it harder? Here I’ve been all these years, teaching my three children that you can’t get something for nothing. If you want something, you have to work for it. Now along comes the Senate to debate an immigration bill that would undermine that very principle. It’s a simple question of mathematics. The Heritage Foundation’s Robert Rector—probably the most widely quoted expert in the country on immigration—has crunched the numbers and figured out the average illegal immigrant family receives about $30,000 annually in government benefits. But that same family pays only $9,000 in taxes. You don’t need a calculator to see that leaves a shortfall of $21,000. As Rector puts it, that’s like having the taxpayers buy every illegal immigrant family a brand-new Mustang convertible every year! And by taxpayers, of course, I mean you and me. And your neighbors. And your friends. I’m talking about everybody who clings to the notion of fair play and hard work—who thinks the American Dream is something you strive to earn, not something you passively accept, as if it were a government handout.” —Rebecca Hagelin

Culture

“Abortion on demand cannot be seen in isolation from social breakdown. In 1973, near the end of the Vietnam War and the approaching resignation of President Nixon two years later, the focus on self, pleasure and convenience by Baby Boomers was at its height. Marriages easily dissolved as ‘no fault’ divorce laws were passed; cohabitation and out-of-wedlock births were on the rise; ‘unwanted babies’ (who were labeled ‘products of conception’ to make it easier to deny the obvious) became an impediment to the pursuit of pleasure and material gain. Abortion was not a cause, but a reflection of our decadence and deviancy. One does not begin to kill babies until other dominos have fallen. And once they have fallen, it becomes difficult to set them aright because to do so would require an admission of something so horrible that those responsible for this fetal holocaust would have to acknowledge their sin and repent of it. Such a thing is not a character trait of this most pampered generation. In recent years there have been signs that things may be—if not turning around—then moderating... Politicians and judges could help bury Roe by requiring that pregnant women receive complete information about the nature of the life within them, including being required to view sonograms before electing abortion. This would follow truth-in-labeling and truth-in-lending laws by fully informing and empowering women. Such an approach would satisfy the liberal demand to keep abortion ‘safe and legal’ and the pro-life desire to make them rare. After 35 years of slaughtering our young, isn’t it time to stop? That child born in 1973 could be a parent now. There are children who could have been born today. Thirty-five years of killing has diminished and corrupted us all. Let’s summon the moral courage to stop it for our sake and for theirs.” —Cal Thomas

Family

“Christian conservative views and small government views logically go together. The key is realizing that growth in governmental ‘human services’ has come in part through the recognition of real problems. When a guy and a gal shack up, it’s not purely a personal matter. That’s because one result, a certain percentage of the time, is likely to be a child with a single mom, and that child at some point is likely to receive governmental support. Or look at divorce: When children are involved, a judge’s custody decision determines where they should live, where they should go to school, and sometimes what language they should speak. The kids are at physical risk: the growth of governmental child protection agencies parallels the surge in broken families... Overall, family non-formation or malformation leaves kids more likely to mess up in school or drop out. Teens with an absent parent are more likely to commit crimes or get pregnant. They are more likely to have mental and sometimes physical health problems. All of this leads to bigger government... Social conservatism makes possible fiscal conservatism.” —Marvin Olasky