Outlawing Divorce & Adultery. Only gays left on Capitol Hill!

Finally my views in print in a bigtime newspaper! Too bad I'm not Dimitri Vassilaros. It's amazing the way he read my mind!

Divorced from reality

By Dimitri Vassilaros
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Friday, February 11, 2005

If social conservatives really wanted to protect marriage, the Marriage Protection Amendment would prohibit divorce.

In his State of the Union address, President George W. Bush said he would support the constitutional amendment to "protect the institution of marriage." He called marriage "sacred." But his manipulation of its "protection" is profane.

Bush and his spiritual soul mates are using what had been titled the Federal Marriage Amendment to protect marriage by banning it. (Same-sex marriage, that is.)

But it does not stop states from extending or prohibiting marriage-like benefits to same-sex and opposite-sex couples in cohabitation.

Presumably, married gays and lesbians, and couples shacking up, are blasphemy to the feds. "Smite them, Lord, before they continue to defile!"

Or whatever.

Let's call their bluff. Homosexuals are a small sliver of humanity. Even if they all paired up and got hitched tomorrow at those funky Viva Las Vegas Elvis-themed wedding chapels, how would that threaten your marriage?

Divorce, by definition, is the threat to the "sacred" institution. So let's use that in a counterattack. Let's put those who would deny Americans that most basic civil right, on the defensive. Let's see if marriage really is a sacred cow or just something to be milked politically.

Opponents of the grossly misnamed social engineering amendment must lobby to change the wording to include a prohibition of divorce.

If they succeed, we could sit back and see if U.S. senators such as Pennsylvania's Rick Santorum and other so-called marriage defenders have the intestinal fortitude and the political backbone to truly protect marriage by spelling out a ban to its only threat, D-I-V-O-R-C-E (as Tammy Wynette would have called it).

You would think principled social conservatives would just love this genuine marriage protection. You would think.

Tony Perkins is president of the Family Research Council. The FRC claims it "champions marriage and family as the foundation of civilization, the seedbed of virtue, and the wellspring of society." It looked like the ideal organization to support a divorce prohibition so marriage finally can be protected properly.

Looks are deceiving.

"Most conservatives do not see divorce under the purview of the federal government," Perkins said. Marriage is, but divorce isn't. Only John Kerry could appreciate the subtlety of that nuance.

Katherine S. Spaht, a social conservative and darn proud of it, also is a professor of law at Louisiana State University. Spaht drafted the legislation that toughened the divorce laws in the Bayou State. To her credit, she is outing the social conservative hypocrites who want to protect marriage -- as long as the laws do not apply to them.

"It would take another generation to outlaw divorce," Spaht said. "People say, 'yes, we have too much divorce.' As an abstract, they agree, but they do not want the law to apply to them."

So much for protecting marriage.

Social conservatives have been getting a free ride on this marriage protection thing. It is time to "out" the divorced ones. Everyone should be made aware of how many spouses have been discarded by proponents and how many have had, or are having, extramarital affairs as they protect marriage.

It is everyone's solemn duty to protect this sacred institution.

Dimitri Vassilaros can be reached at dvassilaros@tribweb.com or (412) 380-5637.

Can I hear an Amen???