Stakes Are Rising in States Falling for Homosexual Political Agenda

Inside the Issues with Alan Sears

Alan Sears, Esquire
ADF President, CEO, & General Counsel

April 21, 2009

It wouldn't surprise Professor Harold Hill to learn they've got Trouble in Iowa – but the problem's now considerably worse than pool tables and "dime novels hidden in a corn crib."

Earlier this month, the Supreme Court of Iowa – where same-sex couples (by their own count) represent only 0.2 percent of the total population – struck down the state's Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), declaring it to be in conflict with the state constitution. That is, to say the least, a curious conclusion – and a flagrant demonstration of judicial activism – given that marriage has been a strictly one-man, one-woman proposition in Iowa for as long as the state's been a state.

That's also how the state's DOMA defines marriage, and the DOMA was passed by a nearly unanimous vote in 1998 by the people of Iowa, as represented by their state legislators. ADF attorneys represented several of those legislators in the recent case, filing a friend-of-the-court brief with the high court on their behalf in defense of the DOMA.

But "in one stroke, seven unelected justices of the court turned 170 years of Iowa public policy on its head," says long-time Iowa attorney and ADF Senior Legal Counsel Douglas Napier. "The Iowa marriage law was simple, settled, and overwhelmingly supported by Iowans. The Defense of Marriage Act was nearly unanimously supported by the legislature when it was passed. It was supported by the governor and a majority of Iowans.

"There was simply no legitimate reason for the court to redefine marriage," he says."The court stepped outside of its proper role of interpreting the law and has instead overruled the will of the people and created new law.  Now it's time for the Iowa Legislature to allow the people to vote on marriage as one man and one woman by placing a marriage amendment on the ballot. Let Iowans be heard. The legal definition of marriage should be in their hands, not the hands of unelected judges."

Meanwhile, in Vermont – the first state ordered by its Supreme Court to implement "civil unions" a few years ago –a group of activist legislators, building on that earlier court order, trumped the will of the people.  On April 7, the state legislature overrode Gov. Jim Douglas's veto of legislation that fabricates same-sex "marriage" in Vermont. So much for the idea that "civil unions" (court-mandated or otherwise) can serve as a legal compromise to protect marriage.

"This move demonstrates without question that ‘civil unions' are never acceptable middle ground," says ADF Senior Legal Counsel Austin R. Nimocks. "They are the groundwork used to pave the way toward redefining, and even abolishing, marriage. Other states should not be naïve."

Meanwhile, Washington, D.C., officials announced that same-sex "marriages" from other jurisdictions will now be legally recognized within the district – indicating their willingness, like that of Iowa judges and Vermont legislators, to clear the legal path for homes where children will not have the benefit of a mother and father.

"The state should do everything necessary to ensure that children aren't denied their most important birthright: a mom and a dad," Nimocks says.  "All non-partisan research and plain common sense tells us that when children are denied a mom and a dad, it leads to far more drug use, early sexual activity, criminal activity, mental depression, suicide, and problems in school.

"The issue is bigger than a ‘personal relationship,' he says.  "How can we justify hurting an untold number of children for the possible emotional benefit of a very small number of adults?"
(According to U.S. Census Bureau statistics, same-sex couples represent only 0.6 percent of the total population of Vermont and no more than 1.2 percent of the total population of the District of Columbia.)

No, it hasn't been a good month for marriage in America – and we're still awaiting the judgment of the California Supreme Court on the fate of same-sex "marriage" in that state.  But don't be discouraged by reports that "the battle is over."  God's still on His throne, the biblical directives on marriage are clear, and the Alliance Defense Fund legal team is working tirelessly to defend that truth in courts all over America.

What's more, the vast majority of the American people want marriage protected.  In 30 out of 30 states where voters were given an opportunity to define marriage, one-man/one-woman marriage won strongly every time.  In addition, national polls show that nearly two-thirds of Americans believe marriage should be the union of one man and one woman.

So, we pray.  There are good people in the Iowa and Vermont legislatures, working tirelessly to counteract, circumvent, and redress these bad votes.  There are wise judges who recognize the truth and elevate it over personal and political agendas – including the temptation to expand their role.  And there are hundreds of thousands of courageous Americans standing for the Truth in their communities.

May God bless all of their efforts, and those of ADF, to accomplish His purpose in our nation.