In my humble opinion . . .

It was probably inevitable in today's society. The push for same-sex marriages in Texas led to first statutory and then constitutional prohibition of legal recognition of the unions. As other states began to confer the benefits and privileges of marriage on same-sex couples the battleground has shifted to recognition in divorce courts.

In a recent case in Travis County (40 square miles surrounded by reality), a judge required the parties seeking a divorce to offer briefs on the constitutionality of whether he could legally grant a divorce of their relationship based on the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution. In other words, he is asking for legal cover to recognize the marriage relationship that is unconstitutional under the Texas Constitution by declaring failure to do so unconstitutional under the U.S. Constitution.

The full faith and credit clause of the U.S. Constitution states that "Full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state. And the Congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceeding shall be proved, and the effect thereof."

The purpose of the clause was to give some continuity across states. Contracts and agreements from one state would be recognized in other states. It was to prevent a person dissatisfied with a legal decision in one state from going to another state and having the issue re-litigated for a different outcome. But notice that Congress was given the authority to establish the rules for how the clause was to be implemented.

In 1996 the Congress statutorily defined marriage for federal purposes as a union of a man and a woman and expressly granted states the right to refuse to recognize marriages performed in other states. That definition means that for the purposes of any federal benefits, same-sex marriages are not recognized. It also means that Texas has the right to not recognize a same-sex union - both the creation of such a union and the dissolution of the union.

But that does not stop the legal battles from raging. In this case, the Attorney General of Texas has interceded to prevent the judge from going forward with his ruling.

There is a part of me (the part that has no mercy) that could care less about this situation other than to hope the rule of law continues to prevail in the state and that the legal system is not used to attempt an overthrow of a provison of our constitution.

The other part of me mourns for the women and the adopted child in this situation. Regardless of how or why the state defines marriage or family, a four-year-old little boy is caught in the battle not of his own making. And, he is not alone. There is a struggle going on beyond just the personal relationships, driven by an agenda that would rip the fabric of our society apart. Marriage, a relationship called to be held in honor among all, has become a political football and a subject of ridicule.

In only one generation we have gone from the TV depiction of Ward and June Cleaver as the model family to the point where an intact, healthy family is rarely shown. There is no longer any social stigma attached to divorce. An unwillingness for couples to reconcile their differences and behave like adults has resulted in simplifying the divorce procedure. The resulting divorce rate plus the increased number of out of wedlock births has escalated the break-up of the family. And, while adults may actually deserve the consequences of their behavior (no mercy, again) the children and our society certainly do not.

An appaling and horrible thing has happened in the land; the prohets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule at their direction; my people love to have it so, but what will you do when the end comes? Jermiah 5:30-31