Yesterday the US Supreme Court began hearing arguments in favor of California’s constitutional amendment protecting authentic marriage. The Los Angeles Times over the last few days has dumped a blizzard of articles favoring the homosexual position. All the major newspapers walk in lockstep on this issue, refusing to cover those who defend marriage. The Times routinely falsifies perspectives (e.g., in illustrating the French pro-marriage marches, photographs show only homosexual counter-demonstrators, as if the march were promoting gay “marriage”). Who is paying for this media censorship?
The media portrays the same-sex “marriage” movement as a civil rights battle. But note this obvious difference: in civil-rights battles, the people force the government to change laws; in the same-sex “marriage” battle, the government is forcing the people to accept a change in the law. Which look more like the civil rights marches of the 1960s—the immense marches in Paris and Washington or the small gatherings of homosexual “marriage” supporters? The fact is that the gay “marriage” issue has been manufactured by the government and media elites. The people for their part have rejected same-sex “marriage” in almost every popular vote. The people of California, for example, voted to protect marriage by a constitutional amendment in 2008; one man from the government, U.S District Judge Vaughn Walker, overturned the will of the people. It is true that the peoples’ will is slowly changing—but only after forty years of relentless propaganda from government and media.
Which raises the question: why is the government, and the media, so bent on dismantling marriage? What do they gain from it? And the answer, it seems to me, is simply one of power. Rulers seek influence and control. The single most effective check on governmental control is the family, based on authentic marriage. The family is a powerful governing force independent of the state. It thinks on its own. Unified and organized families hardly need any governing principle beyond themselves. And this independent power has become increasingly intolerable to the globalized, all-encompassing governments of our day. Promoting promiscuity, sexual infidelity, and divorce are all ways to destabilize the family. And now, the government seeks to render the very idea of marriage irrelevant by claiming two men—or whatever number and arrangement it so deems—is a “marriage.” It is a most effective way of neutralizing the power of the family. By dismantling the family, the government makes every citizen a de facto ward of the state.