Homosexual Activist Wayne Besen Makes a Strong Case for a Federal Marriage Amendment

What will happen if California's highest court imposes "gay marriage"?
The quotation below was sent to us by Gary Glenn of American Family Association of Michigan. Homosexual activist Wayne Besen, author of Anything But Straight, describes the chaos that would result if California's highest court were to mandate homosexual "marriages." Rather than create public sympathy to rectify alleged anti-homosexual "discrimination," as Besen hopes, we think the ensuing confusion would only heighten citizens' awareness of the crisis caused by the homosexual lobby and arrogant, social-engineering courts.
Only a Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) would establish a national standard preserving the historic institution of marriage as one-man, one-woman - perhaps in name only if current trends continue. California becoming a "gay marriage" state would certainly breathe new life into the FMA. However, another cultural/legal/political battle would follow over "civil unions," which - far from being an acceptable compromise - are merely another tactic advancing the "gay" activists' goal of putting government power and authority behind homosexual couples and the creation of unnatural "families." And as the people of Massachusetts and Vermont know well, lots of bad things (e.g., more pro-homosexual indoctrination in schools, curtailment of moral freedoms) flow from state-sanctioned homosexuality.
The only way to solve the same-sex "marriage" crisis permanently is to enact a civil-unions-precluding Federal Marriage Amendment to our Constitution. Assuming that the pro-family movement lacks the guts, competence and consensus to do that (or even attempt it), the next (or parallel) battle would be over whether and how "civil unions" are recognized state-to-state - or mandated nationally. Because the "civil unions" landscape suggests the same problem of varying definitions of "unions" and "marriage," our biggest fear is that the question will end up in the U.S. Supreme Court, which - in all its magnificent wisdom - would attempt to create a "one-size-fits-all" solution to the problem that likely would be about as successful in ending the cultural debate over homosexuality as Roe v. Wade was in ending the abortion debate. - Peter LaBarbera
Besen writes:

"(T)he California Supreme Court may…come out in favor of same-sex marriage as early as May 23. …If same-sex marriage becomes a reality in America's largest and most influential state - and is not overturned by a Constitutional Amendment - it will be the biggest earthquake to hit in years. The sheer number of couples who will marry (and divorce, it is California, after all) will forever change this debate. It will cause a legal mess, as many of these married couples - often with children - migrate to states that still discriminate. The consequences of such relocations will force the entire country to grapple with this issue. No longer will the debate be theoretical, but will focus on the discrimination endured by families whose married status vanishes the moment they cross state lines."– Wayne Besen, "Observations," originally printed April 24, 2008 (Issue 1617) in "Between The Lines News" [BTL is a homosexual newspaper in Michigan]); http://www.pridesource.com/article.shtml?article=30056.