Defending marriage without hating anyone

Authors note:
Most of the comments I’ve received regarding this post will not be published–there are too many activists who have waaaaaay too much hatred in their hearts when it comes to anyone (like me) with a differing point of view.

I’m deeply offended when activists claim those of us who believe a marriage can only occur between a man and a woman are filled with hatred toward homosexuals. It’s not about hate or phobia, it’s about biology (plumbing if you will), sociology, anthropology, and history.

Nonetheless the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) defining marriage as a union between one man and one woman. Despite many mainstream media outlets claiming the ruling is a total victory for so-called “same-sex marriage,” the decision does not create a constitutional right for same-sex partners.

The Court struck down Section 3 of DOMA, meaning that the federal government cannot define marriage for its own federal policies and federal laws, but must accept whatever states decide. The ruling does not affect Section 2, which says that no state is required to recognize another state’s redefinition of the institution.

In striking down Section 3 of DOMA the Court failed to recognize that, just as the states have constitutional authority to make state policy about marriage, Congress can pass a federal statute defining a term used in federal law, and that’s what DOMA has done for marriage. Because Section 2 of DOMA still stands, no state will be required to recognize another state’s redefinition of marriage.

Therefore, despite the wishes of homosexual activists, the critical role of marriage is not diminished by this decision.  The Court’s ruling did not create a federal constitutional right to same-sex marriage as it did for abortion in 1973.  Likewise the Court did not declare same-sex marriage a civil right on the order of ethnicity or nationality.

Those who want to redefine marriage suffered a significant defeat. The Supreme Court refused to declare a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, and rejected their request to impose a redefinition of marriage on all 50 states.

To date thirty-eight states affirm marriage as a union of one man and one woman, and 94 percent of countries worldwide affirm the same.

Meanwhile the Court’s decision on California’s Proposition 8 has allowed a victory for judicial tyranny.  Californians, like citizens of all states, should be able to count on their elected officials to stand up for initiatives passed by the people. However leftist Governor Jerry Brown and close-friend-of-Obama, California Attorney General Kamala Harris, refused to do their duty to defend Proposition 8. In it’s decision the Supreme Court of the United States declared that if state executives refuse to defend state laws, the people can’t stand up for themselves.

That’s not government of the people, by the people, and for the people–that’s tyranny.

My personal hope for those who are attracted to members of the same sex is identical to the hope I have for America—that they/we will be liberated by the love of God. As Saint Paul said in the New Testament book of Romans: “If you declare with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.” (Romans 10:9-10).

That’s not hate. That’s real love.

Brian Sussman

Reader Interactions


  1. Heather says

    This is why I love you, Brian. Because what is important to you is not necessarily the legislation, but the legality thereof. I don’t understand why people are celebrating DOMA’s partial repeal, because it really doesn’t give more rights to them- members of the military, but that’s all. I am not a proponent of same sex marriage, but I am an equal rights proponent. I don’t believe in gay marriage, because marriage is a religious, not government, institution. I do, however, believe that gays who wish to unite should have the same benefits that a married couple should. They are consenting adults- they are just not the religious definition of married. It may seem semantics to some, but it is not to me.

  2. Scooby's Doo says

    You have every right to your opinions here – just not sure why this affects you in any way. If you don’t want to marry someone of your own gender I have a solution … don’t

    We have many issues in this world so working tirelessly to deny rights that have no personal impact on those not involved is a bit over the top.

  3. Kristin Ford says

    Thank you Brian for bringing some clarity to what just took place with the vote. It was and is a sad day for us Christians and Americans who know that God holds the patent on Marriage and NO man can change that. I posted on my Fbook page this. “Gods law is for equal rights He decreed that Man+ Woman = Marriage He is the Supreme Ruler.” I got responses back with hate from people I thought were a little conservative.Especially from my brothers partner whom I have known for years and never once have I said his life is wrong. He went off on how I need to see the lighrt and come into the 21st century. Its the Human Rights Law and I am not supportive of this so I am not compasionate. On and On..So Iwill continue to love but not agree or shrink back on my hearts belief.
    Thank you for sharing the scripture in Romans. This is a time for the church to come together in prayer. We have been too silent all these years.
    Hope to see ya around the Bay one of these days.

    Kristin Ford
    San Ramon

  4. Bing D. Mesias says

    Believing that marriage is only between a man and a woman isn’t anonymous with hating homosexuals. Who sez? That’s putting words in another’s mouth that wasn’t uttered at all. It’s all biology, etc. etc.. even religion. Hate is a very strong word – let’s keep it out of the issue.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Share This