The difference between gay people and black people is homosexual behaviour is a sin, dark skin isn’t a sin. Therefore, although interracial marriage was illegal in some states decades ago, it’s never been immoral. Gay “marriage,” however, has always been immoral.
The Respect for Marriage Act doesn’t respect marriage at all. A more accurate name for the bill is the “Disrespect for Marriage Act.”
Alliance Defending Freedom described the bill as not merely a law that codifies the Supreme Court’s ruling on Obergefell (gay marriage) as federal law, but a “misnamed bill that expands not only what marriage means, but also who can be sued for disagreeing with the new meaning of marriage.”
They also said, “The Respect for Marriage Act threatens religious freedom and the institution of marriage in multiple ways:
- It further embeds a false definition of marriage in the American legal fabric.
- It opens the door to federal recognition of polygamous relationships.
- It jeopardizes the tax-exempt status of nonprofits that exercise their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.
- It endangers faith-based social-service organizations by threatening litigation and liability risk if they follow their views on marriage when working with the government.
The truth is the Respect for Marriage Act does nothing to change the status of same-sex marriage or the benefits afforded to same-sex couples following Obergefell. It does much, however, to endanger religious freedom.”
As always, Alliance Defending Freedom’s explanation of the legal and cultural ramifications of the law are helpful. But the Respect for Marriage Act disrespects the institution of marriage in another way.