|
|
"A comprehensive, collaborative elections resource."
|
The Elephant in the Room: Boldly defending marriage
|
|---|
| Parent(s) |
Issue
|
| Contributor | Jason |
| Last Edited | Jason Jul 21, 2010 01:08am |
| Logged |
0
|
| Category | Op-Ed by Candidate |
| Author | Rick Santorum |
| Media | Newspaper - Philadelphia Inquirer |
| News Date | Wednesday, July 14, 2010 07:00:00 AM UTC0:0 |
| Description | It seems fitting that my last regular column here concerns a cultural issue, as this newspaper's editorial page and I often disagree on such issues.
Political consultants warn candidates to stay away from these issues because they are so personal and emotionally charged. The abortion debate is one on which I chose to ignore their advice. The reason: I simply could not square voting to permit the killing of an innocent baby in the womb with the Constitution I swore to defend, the God I try to obey, or the people I pledged to serve.
In 2004, when I was in the Senate, another contentious cultural issue returned to the national scene as a result of a judicial decision. The highest court in Massachusetts ruled that the state's definition of marriage was discriminatory, and it further exercised its raw power by requiring the Massachusetts legislature to change state law.
This was not the first time this happened. In 1993, the Hawaii Supreme Court invalidated its state's marriage law and paved the way for same-sex marriage there.
The concern then was that other courts, using the U.S. Constitution's Full Faith and Credit Clause, would force other states and the federal government to recognize these judicially imposed marriages. In a rare moment of bipartisan accord on such cultural issues, Congress and President Bill Clinton responded by enacting the Defense of Marriage Act to protect states from further judicial assault. |
| Share |
|
|
2¢
|
|
| Article | Read Full Article |
|
| Date |
Category |
Headline |
Article |
Contributor |
|
|
