Skip to main content

What was missing from the State of the Union Speech

FRCBlog linked to statements by Tony Perkins, who points out what the President missed on his speech.
The President was vigorously applauded for his many bold and unwavering words about the war on terror. Unfortunately, on a number of critical issues, the same resolve was missing. The President was right in pointing out that activist judges threaten marriage and the overall culture. And parents are rightly concerned about that. However, with a vote on a marriage amendment just weeks away in the U.S. Senate, the President should have called on Congress to act before it is too late. Since last year's State of the Union, in which the President did call on Congress to pass a marriage amendment, the threat has only increased with more judicial activism, including a federal judge striking down a state marriage amendment passed by over 70% of the voters. In the very liberal state of Maryland yesterday, the legislature began hearings on a state marriage amendment spurred on by the recent decision of a Baltimore judge that would, if upheld on appeal, impose same-sex marriage on that state. During yesterday's testimony, even Democratic Delegates grilled the AFL-CIO witness, who testified against the marriage amendment. "If I believe in the right of the people to vote on this issue, have I alienated the AFL-CIO?" Delegate Theodore Sophocleus asked incredulously. The union rep admitted that union members had not been polled on this issue. FRC's Vice President for Policy Peter Sprigg also testified before a packed committee room in Maryland's General Assembly. Some 250 witnesses for marriage lined up inside and streamed outside the hearing room, outnumbering witnesses for same-sex unions by 6 to 1. Marriage is no "wedge issue;" it is a bridge issue. The President missed a great opportunity last night to reach out to the Values Voters who re-elected him last year, and who gave him majorities in both Houses of Congress
Interesting little graph they put together.


Recently I have been hearing a lot of criticism for what is perceived as "one-issue" voters. While I can't deny that there are some voters that are mindlessly "single-issue" voters, and who simply follow the lead of their favorite advocacy non-profit, I think politicians and critics alike are missing one important point. Some of these so-called "single-issues" are more than that. Defense of marriage, for example, has to do with a lot more than just gay rights. It has to do with a primary and important social foundation. The destruction of marriage, by turning it simply into a "government sanctioned welfare program," will have serious and negative consequences on our economy, social fabric, and more. Likewise with abortion and cloning. It has to do with the core values that hold up this great nation. So, no, it is not "single-issue" voting. It is "back to the basics" voting that has long term dividends and is well worth defending and fighting for. So, vote pro-life, vote pro-defense of marriage, and vote for those who will uphold a moral and social standard that will move our great nation forward, not backwards.

These are more than just single issues--they are foundational issues. If a elected politician cannot be trusted to respect life, the foundational human right, how can he respect other human rights? If an elected official cannot be trusted to respect the institution of marriage, what makes you think he will respect the institutions of business, the family, and church? We must see beyond the rhetoric, and vote according to what is important for our society. I think most Americans can relate to this.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Hispanic Trending: Leave your name at the border

Most people miss the fact that Hispanics do not consist of a single ethnic group. Besides that, the heritage that each one of the many nationalities represented in our immigrant population is diverse in itself. As I read Manuel Muñoz's post on his assimilation experience, I can tell you mine was nothing like his. But I can relate to this paragraph. My niece's name is Katie Belle (Sierra). It's intriguing to watch "American" names begin to dominate among my nieces and nephews and second cousins, as well as with the children of my hometown friends. I am not surprised to meet 5-year-old Brandon or Kaitlyn. Hardly anyone questions the incongruity of matching these names with last names like Trujillo or Zepeda. The English-only way of life partly explains the quiet erasure of cultural difference that assimilation has attempted to accomplish. A name like Kaitlyn Zepeda doesn't completely obscure her ethnicity, but the half-step of her nam…

RealClearPolitics: The Democrats Dither on Trade

The backtracking on free trade in South America has been among the frustrating news for me coming out of the beltway. Considering how the economic downturns in Latin America affect us through the increase in illegal immigration, I would think more Americans would be fighting for this one as loudly as they fought for the failed Immigration legislation. Democratic presidential candidates like to talk about "turning a page" in America's relations with the rest of the world. But what does that mean, in practical terms, on bread-and-butter issues such as trade? Are today's Democrats a party of open markets and economic development, or of market restrictions and job protection?The answer is that leading Democrats seem to want both -- they favor economic development overseas but not at the cost of U.S. jobs. That sounds like a coherent position until you begin to look carefully at the political choices in Latin America, a part of the world where …

The Importance of English for Immigrants

With all the attention to the border security problem, and the challenges the nation is facing in regards to immigration, here are some thoughts on why learning English is of such importance to immigrants. More importantly, America would benefit greatly if we put a higher priority on getting immigrants to learn English. We are talking about improvements for the economy, reductions in crime, and much more.

Learning English allows an immigrant to:
1. Spread their wings beyond the urban Spanish-speaking enclaves. This, of course, leads to better integration, and a better understanding of what our country really looks like--nothing like "el barrio" in LA. But it also has implications as far as housing, jobs, and more. If an immigrant feels compelled to only live in certain areas to be close to other immigrants, this will place serious limitations on housing and jobs available. God knows housing prices are bad enough in LA and in Miami.

2. Improve on the job opportunities available.…