Same Sex Marriage

In 2011 SUNACRW passed a resolution in support of the true meaning of marriage.  In light of many Republicans who appear to be caving to liberal pressure we reinterate that stance with this repost of our previous statement.

Marriage Resolution

Whereas throughout the history of the world marriage has been recognized exclusively as between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and

Whereas by the recognition of marriage the state grants special benefits for spouses, and

Whereas the institution of marriage provides society with the specific benefit of its stable continuation, and

Whereas the institution of marriage is highly regulated; and as such, it is not now, nor has it been a universal right for all persons, and

Whereas sexual love has never been accepted as the sole criteria for defining marriage, let it be

Resolved that the Pennsylvania Federation of Republican Women promotes marriage as the union of one man and one woman as husband and wife, and be it further

Resolved that the Pennsylvania Federation of Republican Women confirms its support for the Republican Party position on marriage as articulated in the 2008 Republican Party platform, “Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives.”

“Republicans have been at the forefront of protecting traditional marriage laws, both in the states and in Congress. A Republican Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of states not to recognize same-sex marriages licensed in other states. Unbelievably, the Democratic Party has now pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which would subject every state to the redefinition of marriage by a judge without ever allowing the people to vote on the matter.We also urge Congress to use its Article III, Section 2 power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California.”

Previous Post
Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: