For instance, a Methodist retreat center recently refused to allow a member of a polygamist cult to use a campground pavilion for a ceremony in which he would “marry” five women. The state of New Jersey punished the Methodists by revoking the center’s tax-exempt status—a vindictive attack on the Methodists’ religious liberty and use of their own property.
In Massachusetts, Catholic Charities was ordered to accept polygamous “families” as candidates for adoption. Rather than comply with an order that would be harmful to children, and violated their own religious principles, Catholic Charities closed down its adoption program.
California public schools have been told they must be tolerant of polygamous “families.” But it will not stop with public schools. Just north of the border in Quebec, the government told a Mennonite school that it must conform to provincial law regarding curriculum—a curriculum that teaches children that polygamy is a valid lifestyle. How long will it be before the U.S. government goes after private schools?
Even speaking out against polygamy can get you fired. Crystal Dixon, an associate vice president at the University of Toledo, was fired after writing an opinion piece in the Toledo Free Press in support of traditional marriage . . . Fired — for exercising her First Amendment rights!
Every single person who signed the Constitution believed that polygamy was contrary to "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." They never intended their Constitution to be used as a hammer to impose polygamy on those who believe in traditional marriage. During the nineteenth century, The U.S. Supreme Court, on a number of occasions, affirmed that the First Amendment does not prohibit private parties and voluntary associations who support traditional marriage from "discriminating" against polygamous "families" by teaching traditional views or using their private property to promote traditional families exclusively. In one case, the Supreme Court noted of polygamy that, "It is contrary to the spirit of Christianity, and of the civilization which Christianity has produced in the western world."
Opponents of traditional marriage appear to be left-leaning supporters of Big Government. They have no objections to expanding the power of the State to force others to recognize the legitimacy of their lifestyle. Federal Courts are acquiescing to their demands, and short-circuiting the rights of property and religious freedom to those who oppose polygamy. This movement represents a significant trend away from liberty and towards totalitarianism.
This is why I view a Constitutional Amendment defining "marriage" in accord with "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to be an essential step in preserving liberty and limiting the growth of government.
UPDATE: I've just been informed that I had all of the essential facts in error. None of the infringements of Constitutional liberties reported above -- which did in fact occur -- involved polygamous "families." Rather, the growth of tyranny is being promoted by proponents of same-sex "marriages." For the accurate facts and incisive analysis, see Chuck Colson's essay, The Coming Persecution.