The founder of a leading pro-family legal advocacy group says today’s legislative adoption of homosexual “marriage” in Vermont, like an Iowa court decision just a few days ago, is upsetting, but the decisions are more an aberration than the wave of the future.
“I believe it’s a sad day when elected officials are clueluss about the definition of marriage,” Matt Staver, president and general counsel of Liberty Counsel, told Greg Corombos of Radio America/WND in an interview today. “I doubt they’re competent to be in public office.”
The audio of the interview is embedded here:
WND reported on the decision by lawmakers in Vermont to override Gov. Jim Douglas’ decision to veto “gay marriage.”
The bill passed easily through the Vermont Senate, 26-4, last month, but the House approved it 95-52, just five votes short of the two-thirds majority needed in the 150-member body to override a gubernatorial veto. The Associated Press reports the vote today to override the veto was 23-5 in the state Senate and 100-49 in the House.
Vermont becomes the third state in the country to legalize same-sex marriage, following Massachusetts and Connecticut. Last week, an Iowa Supreme Court ruling overturned the Midwestern state’s ban on same-sex marriage, a ruling that – if fully implemented by state administrators – would raise the total to four states.
Staver, who also serves as dean of the Liberty University School of Law, said the Vermont vote appeared to be the result of pressure from members of the homosexual lobby.
He said the installation of homosexual “marriage” in Massachusetts was the result of four activist justices, as was the case in California until voters rebuffed the state’s Supreme Court.
The Vermont vote marked the first time the decision had been made by elected officials.
“The fact this legislature voted for this doesn’t change … the will of the majority of the people,” Staver said.
Besides the 30 states with a one-man, one-woman definition of marriage installed in their state constitutions, another 16 states have some sort of law establishing that standard, he said.
Even as recently as the November 2008 election, 62 percent of the voters in Florida and majorities in Arizona and California installed the traditional definition of marriage in their constitutions.
Staver said the result is an “overwhelming wave in one direction,” with a “couple of aberrational blips on the screen” mostly because of activist judges.