Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance

Wedding Rings Pray 260U
Yes, America, it’s come to this. Who would have expected that in this country an organization would be necessary to protect and defend those who have had their persons, property, and/or their livelihoods threatened because they oppose the redefinition of marriage to include same-sex couples?

The Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance is dedicated to one, simple, and profound idea: No American should be afraid to exercise core civil rights: to speak, to donate, to organize, to sign petitions, or to vote for marriage as the union of husband and wife.

You’ve probably read stories in the news of those who have been sued because they refused on grounds of conscience to participate in a ceremony recognizing a same-sex couple as married. You’ve probably read of assaults on Californians because of their support of Proposition 8. The MADA has a page of video stories of those who have stood for marriage. Here is their latest video on military chaplains under fire:

If you have been threatened, harassed, or made to feel afraid because you believe in the great, foundational truth of Genesis –we are born male and female and called to come together in love to give children mothers and fathers—Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance is here to help you: you are not alone….

The goal of the Marriage Anti-Defamation Alliance is to create a supportive community for those who have been threatened for standing for marriage, to nip the climate of fear being created in the bud, to expose for fair-minded Americans on both sides of the  debate the threats being made, to conduct high-quality qualitative and quantitative research documenting the extent of the harm, to develop legislative and community proposal to protect Americans right to engage in the core civil rights: to organize, to vote, to speak, to donate, and to write for marriage.

March for Marriage Badge 260One reason I’m writing about marriage is to pro- vide support and ideas for you in explaining your beliefs or answering questions and objections. I think there is a role for bloggers in bridging a gap between think tanks, national organizations, and their work and publications on marriage by further disseminating their information and analysis and writing about it from the perspective of the trenches of our day to day lives as citizens. Our history is one of differences being made by “…the acts and choices of ordinary people…” .

Please send along any references you’ve seen or any objections or questions you’ve heard or discussed. I’m not an all-knowledgeable source, but I’ll work to see what I can find because I want to do what I can to equip all of us.

Pray for our country. Pray for each of us who support marriage because each of us is called to defend and protect it.Your role may not be public or prominent, but in conversations with your children, relatives, neighbors, friends and colleagues when a discussion turns to marriage you are the person God has placed there to speak. May God grant us courage and wisdom in our words and deeds.

An Overview of the Consequences of Redefining Marriage

Wedding Cake Ornament1959The consequences of a legal redefinition of marriage from the conjugal view of marriage to the revisionist view of marriage would be widespread and destructive. In What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense, Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson, and Robert George summarize the “heart” of their argument against the revisionist view in their introduction.

If the law defines marriage to include same-sex partners, many will come to misunderstand marriage. They will not see it as essentially comprehensive, or thus (among other things) as ordered to procreation and family life—but as essentially an emotional union. For reasons to be explained, they will therefore tend not to understand or respect the objective norms of permanence or sexual exclusivity that shape it. Nor, in the end, will they see why the terms of marriage should not depend altogether on the will of the parties, be they two or ten in number, as the terms of friendships and contracts do. That is, to the extent that marriage is misunderstood, it will be harder to see the point of its norms, to live by them, and to urge them on others. And this, besides making any remaining restrictions on marriage arbitrary, will damage the many cultural and political goods that get the state involved in marriage in the first place.1

They list those cultural and political goods next, and you can also find them on page four of the NRO article “Marriage and Politics: Why the debate matters; why the conjugal view can prevail,” with a brief explanation of each.

  • Real marital fulfillment.
  • Spousal well-being.
  • Children’s well-being.
  • Friendship.
  • Religious liberty.
  • Limited government.

I’ll be writing in turn on these benefits of marriage and the damaging consequences of legally revising its definition. I’ll include analysis on these and other consequences from additional sources as I find it. In posts that use information from What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense I’ll be using the photograph of the wedding cake bride and groom ornament as an image. Remember that in What Is Marriage? the authors stated:

…our argument makes no appeal to divine revelation or religious authority. We think it right and proper to make religious arguments for or against a marriage policy, but we offer no religious arguments here.

There is simple and decisive evidence that the conjugal view is not peculiar to religion, or to any religious tradition.2

Because they made this self-restriction, I also want to bring in our appeals as Christians to the God’s revelation, the Bible, for Scripture alone is our infallible rule of faith and practice.
Ceramic ornament used on the top of a wedding cake in Birmingham, England in August 1959, Andy Mabbett, Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.
1, 2Sherif Girgis, Ryan T. Anderson, and Robert George, What Is Marriage? Man and Woman: A Defense (Encounter Books, New York NY: 2012) 7, 10.