When I went to Birmingham last week, Pop mentioned an excellent article he had read in USA Today.  I had time to read it for myself as he met with his doctors.  I present it to you here, simply, as an opinion.  I happen to agree wholeheartedly with what this writer  is saying.  I realize your opinion may be different and I have no intention of getting into a debate with anyone.  You have as much right to your opinion as I do to mine.  I am not intolerate of others beliefs and feelings, but marriage is marriage.  The definitions of such can not be changed just because a segment of the population thinks it should.  It may be a legal union of some sort…but it isn’t marrage. Perhaps a new word should be created for a new type of union. This article falls in line with my beliefs as a Christian, and I thought it worthwhile to share it with you.




by Brian Babione

The union between one man and one woman — marriage — is timeless, universal and special. It is the only relationship absolutely essential to the future of humanity. False characterizations of marriage as something else confuses the discussion about it.

As diverse cultures have long understood — before cultural elites intentionally began their attempt to change the conversation — marriage is the fundamental building block for all of human civilization, not merely an arrangement between any two or more people who say they love each other. Marriage between a man and a woman naturally builds family — mom, dad and children — and gives hope that the next generations will carry on into the future.

Men and women bring distinct, irreplaceable gifts to family life, and the lifelong, faithful union of a man and a woman benefits society, especially children, in ways that no other relationship can

Marriage is, therefore, society’s time-tested way to bless as many children as possible with both a mom and a dad. Why? Because moms and dads are both necessary. Neither is replaceable by a generic adult. Many men make good dads, but no man can ever be a mom. Many women make good moms, but no woman can ever be a dad.

We as a society should not be comfortable with fostering circumstances where children are intentionally deprived of either a mother or a father. This is not a matter of whom to include in marriage; it is a matter of what marriage actually is. Redefining marriage is nothing short of creating a square circle.

Understanding this, some suggest that we create “civil unions” instead. But people who advocate for that do so with the mistaken belief that everyone will be satisfied with this apparent compromise. In practice, neither side is happy.

In every U.S. jurisdiction where civil unions have been enacted, those who advocated for them subsequently rejected them as inadequate and demanded that marriage be redefined. Opposing same-sex “marriage” while supporting civil unions is akin to the Trojans dragging a wooden horse into the middle of Troy.

Both the direct and indirect attacks on marriage should be recognized for what they are so that society can continue to protect marriage and thereby protect children.

Byron Babione is senior counsel with the Alliance Defense Fund