Reason 1:
The US Constitution exclusively defines the structure and duties of government. It is a simple document, less than 10 pages long. The US Constitution is so short because it does not define social policy, it defines federal powers. Our Constitution states the federal government may not do anything unless the Constitution explicitly gives it the power to do so. Since marriage is never mentioned in the Constitution, regulating marriage is not a power of the federal government. If we amend the Constitution to outlaw gay marriage, we are authorizing the federal government to meddle with marriage and we are making social engineering a federal power.

Reason 2:
Of course, the courts are already involving the government with marriage. Judicial activism is the scourge FMA supporters seek to defeat. Unfortunately, an amendment is the wrong weapon. The Founding Fathers designed safeguards in the Constitution—checks and balances—against judicial activism. First, activist judges may be impeached. If judges are running rampant, it is Congress's responsibility to impeach them. Second, courts have no direct power over any budget, agency, police or military force. Courts rely on Congress and the President to enforce their decisions, but Congress and the President may ignore those decisions. That may sound like anarchy, but again, it is a part of the checks and balances that our Founding Fathers purposefully designed to control the courts. Both the Congresses and the Presidents (for many decades) have neglected these responsibilities and their oaths to "defend the Constitution of the United States." To now amend the Constitution sends dangerous messages that we hold none responsible to their duties and that the Constitution really was the problem all along.

Reason 3:
When Christians ask the government to protect marriage, we are granting that our sacred, God-created institution is a secular matter. Just as we would despise government intruding on other religious matters, such as baptism, we should be seeking to protect marriage from the government. The early Christians did not worry about Roman laws that protected pagan homosexuality, but rather they sought only God's approval for their marriages and lived in a way that made clear their marriages were holy (which literally means separate). The God-created institution of marriage has existed for thousands of years and much of that time the Christian ideals of marriage have not received government sanction. American states did not begin providing marriage licenses until the mid-1800s, and it wasn't until well into the 1900s that all states licensed marriage. Just as in all government regulation, marriage is now used by the government to control and discriminate the population. Marital status is used to assign or deny a variety of government benefits and burdens, including how much taxes are paid, who may receive Social Security, and the availability of health care.

Baptists have historically demanded separation of church and state because government involvement in religious matters always leads to the corruption of the sacred. Since we have allowed the government to take over marriage, using marriage for government objectives (control and discrimination), should we be surprised that marriage is being cheapened and losing its holy nature? The answer does not lie in further government entanglement, but in the separation of marriage from government hands and its firm placement back into the Church. Without government regulation, others would be free to call themselves married, just as they are free to call themselves Martians. Meanwhile, we would be free to live in such a way that it would be clear marriage means something holy to us—and to God.


So, what should we do? Click here to read positive actions to reclaim control of marriage and more.