Tom McClusky jumps from marriage issues to pro-life legislation to judicial nominations. And that might be all in one day.
He is vice president for government affairs for the Family Research Council in Washington, D.C., and represents the group before Congress on a variety of issues. He has a long history of local and national campaign experience, including Bush/Quayle '92 and Dole/Kemp '96. McClusky also has worked as senior policy analyst for the National Taxpayers Union.
He talks to CitizenLink about marriage in America. It's a topic close to his heart — he's getting married in five months.
1. Why is marriage so important?
Health and wealth and sexual fulfillment — in each of these categories, married couples always report immense advantages over individuals who remain single or even couples who might decide to live together.
Marriage is a sacrament. It's one of the only sacraments that two people enter into equally.
2. What is going on in New Jersey? Can we expect same-sex "marriage" to pass this year during the lame-duck session of the Legislature?
It's very possible. They've talked about this, and it's believed that the vote right now would be extremely close. Even with the new Legislature, it would be very close.
In New Jersey, you've seen an eradication of the marriage benefits, by introducing pseudo-type marriage. You start with something like hate crimes, where special benefits should be given to homosexuals. Then you work into something like the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which New Jersey also has. They have civil unions. You keep sharing the benefits that are exclusively to married couples, and eventually, marriage no longer means what it means.
3. Marriage was recently brought up as part of the ENDA debate in the U.S. House. What effect would ENDA have on marriage?
We've seen it already affect marriage. It was ENDA-type legislation that was passed in Massachusetts, in New Jersey, Vermont, in California. A lot of places where you see domestic partnerships or civil unions, it was based on court cases that involved ENDA-type legislation. This is the backdoor to marriage.
4. Can we expect more judges to redefine marriage, like the one in Iowa did?
Definitely. They're going to be emboldened now, with the more homosexual-friendly Congress, and with state legislatures changing over. A lot of times the only stopgap is the state legislature. Until we have a Federal Marriage Amendment, you're going to keep on seeing judges decide how society should be changed or not, instead of the people.
5. We seem to be at a defining point in history regarding marriage. Where are we headed?
After the Massachusetts decision (to legalize same-sex "marriage"), you saw a lot of people wake up, and you saw a flurry of activity in the states, with marriage amendments being passed in a number of states. Since then, it's started to die out a little. The American people are very supportive of marriage being between one man and one woman. More people need to wake up; otherwise, marriage could be lost.
There is a revitalization happening, and there are a number of state legislators who are talking about divorce-reform laws and covenant-marriage laws that strengthen marriage. The more positive we can do for marriage while fighting the negative, the better.
Marriage will always be around, as far as I'm concerned, as a religious institution. Once governments stop believing that marriage between one man and one woman contributes to society — which it does greatly — that society doesn't have much longer to last.
