Supreme Court's DOMA Repeal 'Will Have Long Term Impact' and Create 'Disordered Liberty,' Says Doctor

26
  • supreme court
    (Photo: REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst)
    People wait in line, in the hopes of being seated, to hear the arguments in the case against the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) at the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington, March 27, 2013. For the second day running, the Supreme Court on Wednesday will confront the issue of gay marriage, hearing arguments on a U.S. law that denies federal benefits to legally married same-sex couples.
By Justin Sarachik, Christian Post Reporter
July 2, 2013|3:19 pm

With last week's Supreme Court rulings that voted in favor of same sex marriage by a 5-4 decision, some feel the implications of deeming DOMA unconstitutional will have long term impacts on the nation.

"This is a major decision that will have long term impact. The court accelerated the advance of gay marriage in the U.S., and decided that defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman is unconstitutional," said Dr. Don Sweeting to Christian Newswire.

"No Christian should be unaware of this decision or its implications," he continued.

Sweeting read through all of the 76 pages of the Supreme Court documents and found that most arguments were in favor of gay marriage.

"For the majority who favored gay marriage, equality and freedom are the ultimate values. They view DOMA as unconstitutional for depriving liberty and writing inequality into the law. For the dissent, on the other hand, tradition and Christian morality have greater weight than freedom and equality. It's not that freedom and equality don't matter. But they are valued within the wider framework of a traditional moral order," he writes on his site.

Supporters argue that those who wish to engage in same-sex marriage are within their right to do so, while the dissent focused on tradition and history and marriage as something that can not be judged constitutionally.

Follow us

Another factor was DOMA denying ability for people to marry while on the other hand, allowing it would discriminate against people who hold traditional marriage sacred.

"The majority emphasized that perspectives on marriage have evolved. They spoke of new insights which 'enlarge the definition of marriage,'" said Sweeting. "The dissent, on the other hand, underscored that marriage and family is an ancient universal human institution. Justice Roberts said that DOMA defends a definition of marriage which has been adopted by every state in our nation and every nation in the world for virtually all of human history. They added that we do not know the long term consequences of this radical new experiment in marriage and family."

According to arguments in the Supreme Court case DOMA promoted hate and worked to demean and harm a way of life people chose.

"Finally, according to the majority opinion, this is a singular ruling that stands on its own. Whereas the dissent said that no one should be fooled. It is only a matter of time before the other shoe drops and this opinion becomes enshrined in constitutional law, and that anyone who opposes same sex marriage will be seen as an enemy of human decency," he said "This ruling, said the dissent, will be used to claim that the traditional definition of marriage has the purpose and effect to disparage and injure the person and dignity of same sex couples."

Sweeting feels that ultimately marriage is defined by God's law and that society is heading towards "disordered liberty."

"God's moral law and order stand. There is an ordered liberty which is good. And Jesus Christ still sets people free!" he concluded.

Advertisement
26