Question 2 asks Virginia to treat sex and gender as irrelevant to marriage. We cannot accept that premise because marriage is the institution that joins the two sexes and connects men, women, and children across generations.
Men and women are equal in human dignity, but we are not interchangeable. Our bodies are organized differently for reproduction. Only the union of male and female can create a child, and every child who has ever lived has both a mother and a father. Technology may separate conception from the marital act, and tragedy may separate children from parents, but neither development changes the underlying human reality.
Marriage gives that reality a public structure. It binds a man and woman to one another and, when children come, binds the child’s mother and father to the family they created. The state recognizes marriage not because government must certify every loving relationship, but because the male-female union produces the next generation and creates obligations that extend beyond the wishes of two adults.
Our laws should never demean single parents, adoptive families, grandparents, or others who step forward when families suffer loss or failure. Many raise children with extraordinary courage. Their sacrifices do not erase the ideal; they reveal why mothers and fathers matter. We honor those who fill a painful absence precisely because an absence exists.
Research also recognizes that mothers and fathers contribute meaningfully to childhood development. Studies of father involvement associate an engaged father with positive cognitive, emotional, academic, and behavioral outcomes. Mothers bring their own irreplaceable biological and relational connection, beginning with pregnancy and birth. Individual parents vary, but the categories of mother and father are not artificial labels created by the state. This does not mean every marriage succeeds, but it does mean the law should preserve the family form that joins children to both origins whenever possible.
Question 2 would remove Virginia’s current marriage provision and establish a fundamental right to marry between two adults regardless of sex, gender, or race. Race does not alter the nature of marriage. A man and woman of different races still form the same kind of union as a man and woman of the same race. Anti-miscegenation laws imposed an irrelevant racial barrier upon marriage. Same-sex marriage removes the sex distinction that defines the institution itself.
The addition of “gender” creates another problem. Gender is now used to describe identities untethered from biological sex. If sex and gender are constitutionally irrelevant to marriage, courts may be asked to determine what those terms require elsewhere in family law. We should not pretend broad constitutional language will remain confined to the campaign’s narrowest promises.
This debate is not about whether two adults care for one another. It is about whether marriage has an objective meaning beyond adult affection and government recognition. If marriage is merely a contract between consenting adults, its boundaries rest only on political preference. If marriage is the covenant joining man and woman and ordering them toward family, its boundaries arise from human nature.
We must speak this truth without cruelty. Every person deserves respect. Every child deserves love. Every family facing hardship deserves support. But compassion does not require us to erase the distinction between mother and father or declare biological sex meaningless to marriage. Virginia’s Constitution should recognize reality, not attempt to revise it. Marriage unites the two sexes, gives children a claim upon both mother and father, and carries human life from one generation to the next. We should protect that institution and vote no on Question 2.
Follow Us