Community Magazine December 2009

I t seems simple enough: marriage is the relationship between a man and a woman who decide to share their lives together and perhaps build a family. Even a four-year-old could explain it. But in New York State, this definition of marriage, which has held constant in every civilization since the beginning of time, may not endure much longer. Recently, a tiny, but highly vocal minority has been rallying to corrupt the definition of marriage to include relationships among individuals of the same gender – and they may now be only days away from achiev- ing their goal. Armed with a formidable propaganda machine and an extensive network of allies, this minority has tried to manipulate the issue by rallying under the basic western principle of personal freedom. But legal experts note that while all New Yorkers already enjoy the personal freedom to establish a relationship with whomever they choose, the proposal to redefine marriage will actually infringe on the personal and religious freedom of the majority of values oriented New York families. Think it can’t happen? Seven western countries already formally recognize such arrangements as marriages – Belgium, Canada, Netherlands, Norway, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. Here in the United States, the matter is left to the decision of each state. Thus far, five states have redefined marriage – Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire (the law goes into effect there next month) and Vermont. The State of California had redefined marriage, until an amendment to the State con- stitution known as “Proposition 8” was voted into law in a popular referendum last year. The State of Marriage in the Empire State Currently, New York State recognizes mar- riage as a union between one man and one woman. In July, 2006, the State’s Court of Appeals (the highest court in the State) upheld the constitutionality of this definition, claim- ing that it has logical basis and thus does not infringe upon the rights of those who choose arrangements which fall outside of the tradi- tional definition. It is reasonable, the court said, for the State to believe “that an important function of marriage is to create more stability and permanence in the relationships that cause children to be born,” which quite obviously necessitates limiting marriage to relationships capable of producing children. Secondly, the court recognized the plausibility “that it is better, other things being equal, for children to grow up with both a mother and a father” since “intuition and experience suggest that a child benefits from having before his or her eyes, every day, living models of what both a man and a woman are like.” Thus, the court concluded, the timeless, conventional and cus- tomary definition of marriage is legal. Unsatisfied with the ruling and angry, activ- ists decided that they would force a redefinition of marriage on every family in the State by aggressively lobbying the legislature to enact a new law. And lobby they did – with considerable success. On May 12 th of this year, the State Assembly, with the support of the unelected Governor, David Paterson, voted 89-52 to legislate a radical and unnatural redefinition of the hallowed institution of marriage. The bill will be put to vote in the State Senate – which appears split on the issue – any day now. Significantly, two days after the Assembly’s vote, an in the midst of an unprecedented bud- get crisis, Patterson issued a directive ordering New York State to recognize the status of so called marriages performed in other states where the conventional definition has been similarly corrupted. This directive is binding irrespective of the outcome of the Senate’s vote. What Does This Mean to Us? Many people in our community, and in the Orthodox Jewish world in general, tend to look upon these developments as nothing more than a curiosity, or at most an unfortunate statement on the deterioration of family values in general society. The campaign to redefine marriage essentially seeks to legitimize conduct deemed abominable by the standards of every tradi- tional religion. And, as many religious leaders express, the very notion desecrates the sanctity of the institution of marriage, which mankind Matrimonial Ma y hem Legal experts believe that potential consequences of the proposed redefinition of marriage in New York could substantially affect every family in the state. RICHARD ZAFRANI 60 Community magazine