facebook twitter RSS
Menu
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission and Vision
    • History
    • Board of Directors
    • Board of Advisors
    • Contact Us
    • Close
  • Fellows
    • E. Christian Brugger, D.Phil.
    • Helen Alvaré, J.D.
    • Jennifer Kimball Watson, Be.L.
    • Margaret Datiles Watts, J.D.
    • William E. May
    • Frank J. Moncher, Ph.D.
    • Steve Soukup
    • Dr. Pilar Calva, M.D.
    • Elyse M. Smith
    • R. J. Snell, Ph.D.
    • Close
  • Life
  • Human Sexuality
  • Marriage & Family
  • Bioethics
  • Religious Liberty
  • Blog
  • Contribute

How are we doing?

Most Viewed Blog Posts

  • The #MeToo Movement And Sexual “Morality”
  • A Constitution Made Only For A Moral And Religious People
  • Medical Health Risks of Contraception
  • Facebook And The Intellectual High-Ground
Subscribe
Thanks for signing up!

  >  Issue Briefs  >  Blog  >  The Court Hears Proposition 8

The Court Hears Proposition 8

Posted: March 27, 2013
By: Margaret Datiles Watts, J.D.
Read  
Print This Post
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn

We urge the Supreme Court not to override the democratic process by throwing out the votes of the American people.  This case is not just about marriage, but about the proper role of the courts and the rights of American voters.

Prop 8 and DOMA:

In its landmark marriage case, Loving v. Virginia, the Supreme Court stated that “Marriage is one of the basic civil rights of man, fundamental to our very existence and survival.”  That case affirmed that the right to marriage is the right of a man and a woman to marry.  Same-sex “marriage” proponents often misinterpret and misapply the rationale and decision of this case by drawing a comparison between interracial marriage and same-sex “marriage.”  It is important to remember that the Supreme Court did not re-define marriage in Loving; rather, it affirmed that the right to marry is the right of a man and a woman, regardless of race.  One man and one woman were affirmed by the Supreme Court as basic components of marriage.  The constitutional right to marriage is directly linked to the generation of children and the formation of families; it is not based soley on feelings of love or committment.  Once that becomes the defining characteristic of marriage, there is nothing to stop the definition of marriage from expanding to include threesomes or marriages between blood relatives and any other combination of relationships.

0
591
591

This entry was posted in Blog by Margaret Datiles Watts, J.D.. Bookmark the permalink.
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
Margaret Datiles Watts, J.D.
How are we doing?

Most Viewed Blog Posts

  • The #MeToo Movement And Sexual “Morality”
  • A Constitution Made Only For A Moral And Religious People
  • Medical Health Risks of Contraception
  • Facebook And The Intellectual High-Ground
Subscribe
Thanks for signing up!

Culture of Life Foundation
Contribute

About Us

  • Mission and Vision
  • History
  • Questions and Testimonials
  • Board of Directors
  • Board of Advisors
  • CLF Team

Issue Briefs

  • Most Viewed
  • Subscribe
  • Life
  • Human Sexuality
  • Marriage & Family
  • Bioethics
  • Religious Liberty

CLF Fellows Program

  • About the Fellows Program
  • Jennifer Kimball Watson, Be.L.
  • E. Christian Brugger, D.Phil.
  • Helen Alvaré, J.D.
  • Margaret Datiles Watts, J.D.
  • William E. May
  • Frank J. Moncher, Ph.D.
  • Steve Soukup
  • Dr. Pilar Calva, M.D.
  • Elyse M. Smith

Person and Polis Blog

  • About Steve Soukup
  • Most Viewed

Press Inquiries

P.O. Box 320637
Alexandria, VA 22320
(202) 289-2500
  • communications@cultureoflife.org

Culture of Life Foundation

PO Box 320637
Alexandria, VA 22320
(202) 289-2500

info@cultureoflife.org

Copyright © 2021 Culture of Life Foundation

 

Privacy Policy