web analytics
July 30, 2014 / 3 Av, 5774
Israel at War: Operation Protective Edge
 
 
InDepth
Sponsored Post
IDC Advocacy Room IDC Fights War on Another Front

Student Union opens ‘hasbara’ room in effort to fill public diplomacy vacuum.



Home » InDepth » Op-Eds »

Opposing The Redefinition Of Marriage


The Orthodox community should voice its strong opposition to the new proposals by the mayor of York City and the governor of New York State to legally redefine marriage.

This is not about discrimination. It is about the founding principles of our nation, it is about societal and state interest, and it is about respecting and not undermining the beliefs and institutions of others who may be different from us.

There are four reasons why this legislation should be opposed.

First, the Founders of this great nation embraced the idea of building a moral and virtuous society in a manner that would enable all peoples to fulfill both their inalienable rights as well as their inalienable duties.

These inalienable rights and duties are part of what can be called Natural Law. From Moses to Cicero, to Washington, Jefferson, and Franklin, Natural Law has always defined the distinction between that which is just and that which is unjust, between right and wrong.

The idea of “Justice at Nuremberg” was characterized by Natural Law, since according to Nazi German law the murder of Jews, gypsies, and certain other groups was entirely legal. No society or government should be able to legislate laws or rules that undermine these Natural Laws. Just as a government is proscribed from legalizing murder and theft, so too may it not undermine other Natural Laws.

Marriage has been defined by the very fabric of history, by universal cultural norms, and by Natural Law as being between man and woman. Marriage combines in a union of life, love, and fidelity two people capable of fathering and mothering offspring. It is more than mere kinship or friendship, it is a social and legal bond designed by Natural Law to procreate and continue the existence of mankind.

May a couple opt not to have children? Yes. But undermining an institution that has been designed by history and Natural Law to vouchsafe the future of mankind can be compared to unleashing chemical and nuclear hazards with the potential to undermine mankind’s future. Same-gender marriages undermine Natural Law.

Second, once we begin to redefine the basic integrity of the family structure in this nation, state, or city, we begin to slide down a slippery slope. Such a move will give rise to a movement to legalize the right to have multiple wives. It will give legitimacy to those who wish to allow marriage to one’s sister, daughter, son, or to two sisters simultaneously. It will even give legitimacy to those who wish to enter the bonds of matrimony with favorite pets and animals.

Third, modern social science and scientific inquiry has demonstrated the need of both a mother and a father to help foster the normal psychosocial development of children. While there are times when this is not possible, government should make every effort to improve the ideal environment in which children should be raised.

Redefining marriage will lead to a disaster similar to that experienced by Romania during its orphan crisis in the late sixties and early seventies. That crisis led to a situation where thousands of children were raised outside the structure of families as envisioned by Natural Law. The results were catastrophic.

There will always be exceptions, but it is clearly in the state’s interest to ensure that future children be given the best chances of success possible. Redefining marriages against the state interest in order to allow some members of society to co-opt a term is just wrong.

It has always been in the interest of the state to make sure its citizens and its institutions remain stable. For example, in our country it is the view of the state that ownership of a home provides for more social stability than does a transient lifestyle. The state believes homeowners care more about what happens in their streets, villages and towns because they have a greater stake in things. The state, therefore, has provided tax deductions for homeowners but not for apartment renters. This is not about discrimination. It is about the state interest.

Fourth, redefining the parameters of marriage amounts to a subtle and insidious attempt to undermine the beliefs and principles of those who uphold the sanctity of Natural Law. It is an insult to Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, and practitioners of other religions in this country.

About the Author: The author can be reached at yairhoffman2@gmail.com


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Opposing The Redefinition Of Marriage”

Comments are closed.

SocialTwist Tell-a-Friend

Current Top Story
U.S. President Barack Obama escorts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu out of the Oval Office
Pirated Phone Conversation of Obama Slamming Bibi from Unverified Source
Latest Indepth Stories
Young children 'recruited' by the Al Qaeda-inspired Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (ISIS) terrorist group for a Shari'a jihadist army in Iraq and Syria.

ISIS poses a great threat to the entire civilized world in general and liberal democracies in particular.

kerry clown

Kerry is preoccupied with pressuring Israel, notwithstanding the transformation of the Arab Spring .

journalism

With no shortage of leftist media that seek to distort the news, what should our Torah response be?

Jewish Home leader Naftali Bennett

Because let’s face it: Hamas obviously can’t defeat the IDF in the field, soldier against soldier

As Peres retires, Israel fights sour legacy: Insistence on setting policy in line with hopes, rather than with reality.

Our capital was not arbitrarily chosen, as capitals of some other nations were.

UNHRC High Commissioner Navi Pillay accuses the IDF of possible war crimes in Gaza again, cutting slack to Hamas.

There is much I can write you about what is going here, but I am wondering what I should not write. I will start by imagining that I am you, sitting at home in the Los Angeles area and flipping back and forth between the weather, traffic reports, the Ukraine, Mexican illegals and Gaza. No […]

Should Jews in Europe take more responsibility in self-defense of community and property?

It is time for a total military siege on Gaza; Nothing should enter the Gaza Strip.

Germany’s The Jewish Faith newspaper ominously noted, “We Jews are in for a war after the war.”

The truth is we seldom explore with kids what prayer is supposed to be about.

Almost as one, Jews around the world are acknowledging the day-to-day peril facing ordinary Jews in Israel and the extraordinary service of the IDF in protecting them.

More Articles from Rabbi Yair Hoffman
Rav Moshe Feinstein ZT"L (left), Rav Yosef Eliyahu Henkin ZT"L

How did America’s leading Posek fall into halachic obscurity?

The Orthodox community should voice its strong opposition to the new proposals by the mayor of York City and the governor of New York State to legally redefine marriage.

    Latest Poll

    Do you think the FAA ban on US flights to Israel is political?






    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/opposing-the-redefinition-of-marriage/2009/05/13/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: