by Rep. Bill Dunn
posted September 28, 2006
“For this reason, a man leaves his mother and father and clings to his wife, and the two become one.” When Jesus spoke these words, He observed what people had known for thousands of years before and for 2,000 years since—marriage is between a man and a woman. The definition of marriage did not come about in order to discriminate against another person or group, but because marriage is what marriage is: a union between a man and a woman. Anything else is a lie. Governments do not create marriage; if they are wise they recognize and protect marriage as foundational to a healthy society.
There are those who argue that a homosexual “marriage” would be no different than a heterosexual marriage. Obviously, this is not true. While the marriage of a man and a woman has a potential life-giving procreative power, a homosexual “marriage” is a dead-end street. In order to illustrate this point, imagine a society composed of couples made up entirely of men. That society would age and die—it is not self-sustaining. Society has an interest in sustaining itself and in giving incentives to couples that have that potential. That is why the state has the right to give privileges to those who marry.
Those who are trying to destroy the definition of marriage claim they are entitled to those same automatic privileges. They are not. If people want to enter into an agreement with members of the same sex so they can visit in the hospital or leave an inheritance, they can use what is already available to them. A will can be used to pass on belongings and proper paperwork can allow visitation at the hospital.
Even those who want to change the definition of marriage cannot agree on a new meaning. For example, more than a year ago, I met with a group who was against the proposed marriage amendment. A heated debate broke out among those in attendance because some said marriage should be defined as being between two people, while others said there should be no such number limit. No consensus was ever reached. This exemplifies the reality: to define marriage to include any lifestyle is to define it to include every lifestyle. A definition that can mean anything means nothing.
Those who are working against this marriage amendment will say that their “anything goes” definition does not hurt or affect anyone, as though changing the foundation of society will have no consequences. Common sense and experience tell us that if homosexual “marriage” becomes a right, public schools will be required to use our tax dollars in order to “protect that right” in school textbooks and programs. Clergy and congregations who speak out against this lifestyle will be silenced and punished as is already happening in Canada.
Homosexual groups have vowed to defeat the marriage amendment. As in other campaigns, they will spend millions of dollars, much of it coming from outside the state, in order to sway voters against the measure. It is important for those of us who understand the critical importance of traditional marriage to do all we can to protect it! We must amend our state constitution to ensure that marriage continues to mean what we all know it to mean—one man and one woman.
In life there are some things that just are…a circle is a circle, a square is a square, and a marriage is a union between a man and a woman.
Rep. Bill Dunn (R-Knoxville) has represented the 16th House District since 1994 and currently serves as the House Republican Leader. He can be reached at rep.bill.dunn@legislature.state.tn.us
| Dining Out | Business | Movies | Focus | About Us |
| Church | Living Well | Memories | Outdoors | Real Estate | Student Scene | Travel |
