There is only one litmus test that a politician must pass these days to prove whether or not they are interested in protecting marriage from being redefined by activist judges: “Do you support the president’s call for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage?”

That’s it!

Marriage is under attack, similarly to freedom – and if you are not for protecting it, then you are for its destruction.

John Kerry and John Edwards have tried to sell a false impression to voters on marriage.

Both have said publicly that they oppose the idea of “same-sex marriage.” I have heard their advocates reaffirm this position. I have had extreme right-wingers try to tell me that they are no different than the president on the issue. But this facade is flimsy and should not be believed for even a moment.

Just this week, the National Stonewall Democrats – a group that advocates on behalf of those who practice homosexuality – pronounced Kerry-Edwards as the “most pro-gay ticket in the history of presidential politics.” The Human Rights Campaign – Washington’s largest homosexual lobbying group – gave the two men a 100 percent rating on their voting records on issues of advancing homosexual issues, life and marriage. The National Gay and Lesbian Task Force referred to them as the most “gay-supportive” pairing in history.

These analyses by homosexual activist groups should surprise no one. John Kerry has penned dozens of letters to his home state assembly in Massachusetts, as a sitting U.S. senator, always urging passage of the pro-homosexual view of more than a dozen state-level issues. And it is John Kerry’s own Massachusetts Democratic Party that has pushed “same sex marriage” to the very forefront of debate by aggressively seeking its legalization.

John Edwards has also fought hard for the pro-homosexual initiatives. By compiling his various public statements, senate votes, and even the trial cases he has argued, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force gave him ratings on 13 separate homosexual issues. On nine of the 13, he scored “highly favorable”.

But the two Johns’ inability to defend marriage has even been uttered from their own lips. In the series of primary debates during this spring, the Johns were asked about support for the protection of marriage in America. Marriage, after all, is that unique and sacred relationship between one man and one woman. Both were asked if they would support the president’s call for a constitutional amendment to protect marriage. Both tried to reiterate what they had attempted to clarify before – that in principle they were opposed to “same sex marriage.” However, both also believed there was “no pressing need” to take such dramatic action as to amend the Constitution.

Even more mind-boggling was that in those series of debates they both disputed the validity of the 1996 “Defense of Marriage Act,” which allows states the right to define marriage by state. The two went as far on multiple occasions to insist that had they had the chance to vote on it now, both would vote against it (Kerry, in fact, voted against it the first time – one of only 12 to do so).

Yet in spite of all the evidence of the Johns’ cozy relationship with homosexual lobbyists, activists and advocates, Kerry-Edwards still try to make the straight-faced statement that they believe marriage should still exist exclusively between a man and a woman. What a farce!

In the war on terror, President Bush made it clear from the beginning: You are with us (those who love freedom) or you are with the terrorists (those who wish to destroy it). The present war on marriage is similar. John Kerry and John Edwards wish to try to distinguish themselves as being against “same-sex marriage,” but have voted in favor of everything leading to it and have the highest approval rating in political history by those who seek it.

By being unwilling to support the constitutional amendment that would protect the institution of marriage, it doesn’t really matter what else they say about it. And though John Kerry has a history of being “for certain things before he was against them,” his unwillingness to even be “for” protecting marriage is already telegraphing where he would be when the issue hits the courts and the halls of Congress in the days ahead.

As ambiguous as this duo may want to stay on the issue of “same-sex marriage,” the people of America deserve to know if their leaders will protect our families as strongly as they protect our freedoms.

This duo seems incapable on both counts.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.