New Anti-Gay Group Calls Marriage Equality Unconstitutional, Discriminatory

David Usher, president of the Center for Marriage Policy, a right-wing group founded last month with the blessing of Phyllis Schlafly, argues in a column yesterday that marriage equality is unconstitutional because same-sex marriage is tantamount to polygamy, with the third partner being the government. He argues that the National Organization for Women is trying to use marriage equality to “to convert marriage into a feminist-controlled government enterprise and subordinate the rest of America to entitle it.”

Usher claims that by legalizing same-sex marriage, women regardless of their sexual orientation will marry other women in order to collect government benefits in an “arrangement of government-sponsored economic polygyny,” placing what he calls an unconstitutional and discriminatory social and economic burden on men. “Sexual orientation does not matter when two women marry and become ‘married room-mates,’” Usher writes. “They can still have as many boyfriends as they want, and capture the richest ones for baby-daddies by ‘forgetting’ to use their invisible forms of birth control.”

Forget the terms “same sex” and “gay” marriage. These are victim-based marketing ploys invented N.O.W. to send us off into a heated debate about homosexuality and equal rights — distracting us from seeing their real goal of establishing “feminist marriage”.

Feminists made “feminist marriage” their top long-term goal twenty-five years ago, and invested tremendous resources in it, because they intend to convert marriage into a feminist-controlled government enterprise and subordinate the rest of America to entitle it.

Feminist marriage is a marriage between any two women and the welfare state. It constitutes a powerful feminist takeover of marriage by government, and places the National Organization for Women in the position of dictating government policy as a matter of “feminist Constitutional rights”.

Feminist marriage will be far more attractive to all women than heterosexual marriage. Sexual orientation does not matter when two women marry and become “married room-mates”. They can still have as many boyfriends as they want, and capture the richest ones for baby-daddies by “forgetting” to use their invisible forms of birth control. On average, a feminist marriage will have at least four income sources, two of them tax-free, plus backup welfare entitlements.

Feminist marriage is government-sponsored serial-polyandry, uniquely enriched by one or more substantial income sources not available to the other two planned subordinate classes of marriage.

Male-male marriages cannot reproduce naturally (a primary factor in Constitutional case law). They can acquire children only by artificial means, and at great expense, by adoption or renting a womb. Most men in these marriages will still have regular sexual encounters with women.

Some men in these “marriages” will want to have children. These men will have even more illegitimate children with women in (or contemplating) feminist marriages, most often without informed reproductive consent. “Reproductive fraud” will become the norm in the United States over time.

The longitudinal impact of feminist marriage on reproductive and marital choices of unmarried individuals will be profound. Women who are presently on welfare will be propelled to marry each other, leaving unmarried men already sidelined by the welfare state machinery doubly-disenfranchised. Women who are not married can enter the welfare state by having a child out-of-wedlock, and then double their entitlements by marrying another woman on welfare.

Feminist marriage directly violates 14th Amendment protection against sex discrimination, and the 5th Amendment is violated at the Federal level.

The Constitution cannot accept a structure of three-party marriage establishing an arrangement of government-sponsored economic polygyny as a protected, superior class of marriage under any rational-basis test. Secondly, the Constitution cannot accept any marital arrangement structurally establishing three classes of marriage, where the classes are crisply defined and either rewarded or discriminated against because of the natural reproductive capacity one sex is born with that the other sex does not have.

Corporations supporting the repeal of DOMA are making a tragic mistake supporting feminist marriage. Feminist marriage will demolish men’s drive to be successful, motivated workers. It will also further weaken the American job market and harm women’s employment opportunities. Our “Competitiveness Gap” with marriage-based Asian economies will expand as men’s productivity and educational attainment continues to decline, while growing social problems, violence, and higher taxes stimulate businesses to move jobs overseas.