Moral and Political Aberration by the US Supreme Court

US Supreme Court mmbers 2015MEDIA RELEASE SATURDAY 27 JUNE 2015

“The US Supreme Court has ushered in a new era of civil discord with its politically activist and morally reckless ruling on homosexual ‘marriage’. We must not let that happen here”, said Dr David van Gend, President of the Australian Marriage Forum.

“The moral dementia of the West is evident when the honourable name of marriage is given to a relationship that can only be consummated by an indecent act.

“This is the third historic act of social self-mutilation by the US Supreme Court, the most recent being the Roe-v Wade decision in 1973 that found a constitutional right for adults to kill their babies in the womb.

“Further back, five judges in 1857 imposed the racist abomination of the Dred Scott decision on all the states of the Union.

“Just as the five judges in 1857 were so degenerate as to enshrine slavery in the Constitution, so five judges today enshrine sodomy in the Constitution. The fallout for the moral culture of the US and for the education of children is incalculable.

“The court decision stands against the clearly-stated will of the people, where a majority of 61% to 39% (51.5million to 33 million) have voted in ballots in 35 states to keep marriage a man-woman thing.

“The Supreme Court’s slavery decision was eventually repented of and reversed, just as the homosexual ‘marriage’ decision will have to be repented of and reversed – but after how much social damage is done?

“There is a long and exhausting task now, as there was for the anti-slavery forces under Abraham Lincoln, to damn this Supreme Court decision, this poll of the social values of nine US citizens, as a judicial usurpation of politics and bring about its reversal by all legitimate means.


“In Australia, we are different”, Dr van Gend said.

“Here, the High Court has recused itself from any such usurpation of politics: it has ruled that the question of marriage belongs, properly, in the Federal Parliament.

“In the Federal Parliament, a civil-rights balance has already been achieved: same-sex couples are treated exactly the same as as any other couple, since eighty five laws were amended by a bipartisan majority in 2008. There is no unjust discrimination against same-sex couples in Australia.

“If same-sex couples cannot marry, that is because they do not meet nature’s job description for marriage and family: marriage and childbearing is a specifically male-female phenomenon in nature, and no parliament or court has the authority to repeal biology.

“We must not disturb the balance of civil rights we have at present, because if we do, children will be collateral damage,” Dr van Gend said.

“The right to marry carries with it the right to create a family – and that means forcing any child of a same-sex ‘marriage’ to miss out on a mother or a father. That is a fundamental injustice against the child.

“Australia, unlike America, has recent experience of the grief caused to children by laws that break the primal bond between mother, father and child – think of the recent national apology for the policy of forced adoption, or the older policy separating children from their Aboriginal parents. We have learnt the harm such laws can do, and here in Australia we will not bring in another law, same-sex ‘marriage’, that would break the bond between mother, father and child once more – and would, one day, require its own national apology.

“In Australia, same-sex couples are free to live as they choose, but they are not free to choose a motherless or fatherless existence for a little child.

“Nor are they free to impose homosexual values on our children and grandchildren in the school curriculum, which is what laws for same-sex ‘marriage’ have done overseas and would do in Australia too.

“Nor are they free to use anti-discrimination law to silence the conscientious objection of individuals and churches who see homosexual behaviour as wrong and therefore homosexual marriage as immoral. That, too, is happening overseas under laws for same-sex marriage, but it must not happen here.

“Just as Australia rejects America’s right-wing mindset on guns and the death penalty, so we must reject their judges’ left-wing mindset on homosexual ‘marriage’.

“Even if we are the last western country standing we will not abandon future children to a motherless or fatherless future, or sacrifice the sanity of natural marriage on the altar of sexual license”, Dr van Gend concluded.


Share Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Follow us Facebooktwitterrssyoutube

Comments are closed.