Welcome to Breakpoint, daily look at an ever-changing culture through the lens of Unchanging Truth.

For the Colson Center, I'm John Stone Street.

Last week in the wake of the Democrats' surprising performance in the midterm elections, there

were some indications that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer could be readying the

misleadingly named Respect for Marriage Act for a vote.

While the name of the bill makes it sound as if the Act affirms and supports marriage,

instead it would redefine.

From the federal legislature, what marriage is, and law.

This bill would firmly root marriage, at least legally speaking, and nothing more than

an abstract desires, redefining it from the institution that has offered a bedrock for

civilizations by reflecting the biological realities of whom men and women are, and serving

the needs and best interests of children through the legal recognition of mothers and fathers.

The Respect for Marriage Act would replace the 1996 Defensive Marriage Act, which was signed

into law by President Bill Clinton.

It would also shore up and extend the impact of Obergefalvi Hodges, the landmark Supreme

Court decision that overturned marriage laws in dozens of states, enshrined same-sex

marriage as the law of the land, and redefined the institution of marriage by judicial fiat.

The Respect for Marriage Act is the product of fear from the political left.

In the Dobbs decision, the Supreme Court ruled that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided and

returned the task of abortion law making to the states. The fear here is that a conservative

Supreme Court could do the same thing to Obergefalvi.

Overturn it, although only one justice has indicated a willingness to do that so far,

...