by Tom Wacaster
Supreme Court of the United States
First Street, NE
Washington, DC 20543
To the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court Of The United States of America:
It is with great respect for the office you hold, and the awesome responsibility that rests upon your shoulders that I pen this letter. On Tuesday, April 28, 2015, you listened to arguments from both sides regarding the issue of whether or not it be deemed within the confines of the Constitution of the United States of America to allow marriage to include the union of same sex couples. I downloaded a copy of that court hearing and read it in its entirety. I was disappointed to note that not once was a reference made to God, the Bible, or the moral uprightness of such a union. The arguments focused instead upon the “dignity” of same sex marriages, the violation of their civil and/or constitutional rights, and whether or not a long held tradition of the definition of marriage should be upheld or set aside for those seeking to enter into a union that essentially redefines marriage so as to include those of the same sex.
The Constitution of the United States of America stands as a monumental demonstration of man’s ability to draft a body of legislation that can produce the greatest degree of freedom, while at the same time providing justice for the greatest number of people living under a single law system. History tells us that those men who framed our Constitution did so with the full realization that whether or not their great experiment in human freedom would succeed depended upon the power and providence of God. The American Revolution was the result of their appeal to a higher law than that of England. They fully recognized that there is a law that transcends all human laws. Interestingly, the international community, and civilized nations have, on numerous occasions, appealed to that law in an effort to bring justice to those oppressed throughout the world. Consider just two examples.
First, following WWII the international community sought to bring Nazi war criminals to justice. Those trials were held in Nuremburg, Germany. To what “law” did the international community appeal in their efforts to prosecute the war criminals? It was not German law, American law, Russian law, et al. It was an appeal to a much higher law, and a much higher Law Giver. There are some actions that, by their very nature, violate a much higher law than any law system that men might devise. By your own admission in the court hearings this past month, you recognized that the proponents of same sex marriages are seeking to redefine the marriage institution. The question is not how we, living in this century, might redefine marriage, but how the Great Law Giver has already defined that institution.
Second, rogue nations have, for decades, been denied entry into the commonwealth of civilized nations because of their violation of what we consider “basic human rights.” To what law does the international community appeal when it calls for punishment of those nations that have violated the human rights of their citizens? Certainly it cannot be that nation’s law, for according to their law no injustice has been committed. When we plead for human rights, whether here in the United States of America, or any nation, we are appealing to some higher law, whether we recognize the Law Giver, or refuse to acknowledge His existence.
I appeal to you, as you make your final judgment on the matter of what constitutes marriage, and more specifically who can enter into that institution, that you realize that there is truly a higher law to which all of us must now appeal. That higher law set forth the boundaries of marriage from the very beginning of the human race: “Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh” (Gen. 2:24). The same Law Giver, and the same law upon which our Constitution was established, declares unequivocally that marriage is a divine institution consisting of one man and one woman. If the Allied forces following WWII could bring war criminals to trial for violating that higher law, and if nations today can call for rogue nations to exercise basic human rights as established by some higher law, why cannot you, as the highest court in our land, appeal to that higher law to define marriage. Failure to do so will set a precedent for future generations to ignore that higher law, and depend solely upon the whims and dictates of men to direct their course in life. Should that happen, I fear what shall become of our nation.
May God give you the wisdom and insight in order that you might look beyond what men might think legal, and consider whether or not this is a time to appeal to that greater law as you deliberate on this important issue.
Sincerely,
Tom Wacaster