Press Releases

Delegate Bob Marshall Author of the 2006 voter approved one man, one woman Virginia Constitutional Marriage Amendment Denounces Judge Wright-Allen’s Court Decision

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Delegate Bob Marshall 703-853-4213 or 571-409-0588

MANASSAS, VA -The decision issued by federal district Judge Wright-Allen appropriately issued in the cover of darkness is a syllabus of errors, a compendium of ineptitude, and a farce claiming authority.  Legislating through the Courts against the will of the people is lawless disregard for our representative form of government.

Federal Judge Arenda Wright-Allens’s decision:

  1. Confuses the Declaration of Independence with the United States Constitution (Page 2).  Judge Wright-Allen took an oath to uphold the Constitution and yet she seems to be unable to even identify it;
  2. Vests the judge’s opinion with more social and legal importance than that of the 1.329 million voters who approved the Marshall-Newman Marriage Amendment;
  3. Makes no clear definition of Marriage, though Judge Wright-Allen makes claims about it;
  4. Provides no legal distinctions or reasoning why her version of “marriage” must be limited to only two persons;
  5. Rules that denying marriage to homosexuals is the same as denying interracial marriage.  Therefore race is equivalent to sexual behavior;
  6. Equates the centuries long struggles of Americans of African descent in this country with the life shortening and health compromising behaviors associated with the LGBT lifestyle;
  7. Tries to equate segregationist practices previously prevalent in Virginia providing for separate accommodations for hotels, restaurants and water fountains, denial of voting or educational opportunities are equivalent to the experiences of the modern LGBT community.
  8. Clearly misreads the Loving vs. Virginia Supreme Court decision which affirms the possible procreative aspect of marriage that is only between a man and a woman;
  9. Cites the Fourteenth Amendment as justification for striking down Virginia’s Marriage Amendment even though at the time of its ratification sodomy was illegal in all but five states;
  10.  Fails to explain how homosexual activity can be a predicate for so-called same sex marriage, but can disqualify such participants from donating blood;
  11.  Has pretentions to know more about marriage than Moses and Christ;
  12.  Assumes that anyone who disagrees with her is motivated solely by hate and visceral animus of the LGBT community;

Judge Wright-Allen clearly lacks judicial temperament, has absolutely no sense of judicial restraint, exhibits signs of deracinated thinking and should be impeached.

The natural marriage relationship of man and woman predates all religions.

We recognize the importance of respecting nature when it comes to eating healthy food, drinking pure water, and protecting the natural environment for future generations.   The natural design for the continuance of the human race is dependent upon the different natural attributes of males and females to have children.

Same sex “marriage” discriminates against children by denying them either a mother or a father.  History is replete with evidence of the harm done to children by absent fathers.  Even the United Nations warns that children should not be separated from their mothers at an early age.  Do we really want our children to be taught either in school or by the society at large that there is no difference between heterosexual marriage and homosexual “marriage?”

Same sex “marriage” upends thousands of years of societal disapproval of certain sexual behavior and contradicts moral teachings of major religions sanctions against homosexual activity.  To imply that one state Judge is smarter than the foundations of humanity is extreme hubris.

Equality of persons is not the same as equality of behavior.  While there is no place in society for disrespect for any human being based on their sexual orientation, this does not mean that the state must condone or promote sexual behavior that impairs people with serious illnesses and burdens our health care system.

By basing her decision on a prior reversal of unjust laws which prohibited interracial marriage, Judge Allen asserts that homosexual “marriage” is based on civil rights.  If this reasoning is upheld, then our children will be taught in school that they are guilty of illegal discrimination if they oppose homosexual “marriage” and that there is no difference between homosexual and heterosexual marriage, that any church which denies a marriage ceremony or a business which declines to provide services to a same-sex wedding celebration is guilty of illegal discrimination.  This is already occurring in states where same-sex “marriage” has been legalized.

Adoption agencies, public or private, will be forced to place children for adoption with homosexual couples and refusal will amount to illegal discrimination.  This will likely result in church based adoption agencies being forced to stop doing adoption work thereby leaving hundreds of thousands of children with fewer options. Churches have assisted with adoptions for thousands of years and to force them to comply with this agenda of “tolerance” to the detriment of innumerable children is unconscionable.

If homosexuals can marry whoever they love, then it follows that bi-sexuals should be legally allowed to marry two people, polygamists should marry several, and pedophiles should marry children. There is no logical line to draw once marriage as we have known it from the beginning of time is abolished.

Judge Allen’s decision does not benefit society and does not uphold the common good.  This movement is not about the common good or even about tolerance but about forced submission to a world view which violates the deeply held values of many Virginians.

God loves all His children regardless of the attractions they may experience.  We do not judge hearts. Thankfully God reserves that role to himself.  But we must measure and judge actions to benefit the common good. And we who are chosen by the people to represent their interests passed a Virginia Constitutional Amendment upholding one-man, one-woman marriage and over 1.3 million voters approved it.  Legislating through the Courts against the will of Virginians is lawless disregard for our representative form of government.