The Supreme Court’s First Assault on Marriage  

Dr. Pat Fagan, Senior Fellow and Director, Marriage and Religion Research Institute (MARRI), recounts the Supreme Court case, Eisenstad v. Baird, which ruled “that states could not restrict the sale of contraceptives to married people in his article featured in The Public Discourse. Dr. Fagan also shows the link to this ruling and its detrimental impacts on marriage and society today.

Ken Klukowski Discusses Sulaiman Abu Ghaith and Rand Paul

FRC’s Ken Klukowski’s article on discusses how Sulaiman Abu Ghaith, al-Qaeda’s spokesperson, has been tried under habeas corpus and, even though he is a terrorist, he has the same rights as a citizen on trial. Klukowski also highlights how Rand Paul’s filibuster shows the shifting policy that allows a terrorist to be tried in a civilian court, but may permit drone strikes on U.S. citizens.  

Peter Sprigg on the Upcoming Marriage Cases

Peter Sprigg, Senior Fellow for Policy Studies at FRC, was quoted in a recent Washington Times article which compares Roe v. Wade to the upcoming cases on DOMA and California’s Proposition 8. Sprigg stated:

“If the Supreme Court rules that those kinds of man-woman marriage laws violate the U.S. Constitution, then the effect ‘would be to change the definition of marriage for all 50 states, and impose same-sex marriage on all 50 states,’… ‘That’s why these cases are like the Roe v. Wade of same-sex marriage.’”