The recent decision by the U.S. Supreme Court striking down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and allowing lower court decisions to stand overturning Proposition 8 in California makes for a dramatic shift in American society.  This brief analysis is to consider some of the possible ramifications of the decision. While not a full legal analysis, it does have a lawyer's insight in areas potentially impacting Mormon practices past, present, and future.  The purpose of this post is not to advocate for gay marriage.

I am constantly criticized by my Republicans friends about the apparent contradictory position of being a pro-life Democrat.  To them this position is contradictory and dishonest.  To me voting with this political platform is irrelevant and insignificant.  Why?  Because whether or not someone is pro-life is a moral argument, and these kind of arguments are mainly used to divide the masses.  They are also nearly impossible to legislate.  Republicans go to the polls to elect pro-life candidates and what they get in return is the Republican agenda: tax subsidies for corporations, increased military spending, tax breaks for the wealthy, and pork spending for major donors that funded the campaigns.  What doesn't happen is any major change in the moral issues that were instrumental in driving voter turnout.

Let me give a couple examples. From 2002 - 2006 the GOP controlled the House, Senate, Presidency, Governorships, and appointed 7 of 9 Supreme Court seats.  In 2006 they attempted to pass a gay marriage amendment that did not even garner enough Republican support to make it out of the Senate.  They did not challenge Roe v. Wade or push though any lower court case giving the Supreme Court a chance to rule on abortion (they did however find a way to deliver the Affordable Health Care Act to the high court).  In four years of total control the only moral law the GOP passed was the 2003 partial-birth abortion bill, which was a minor feat given the overwhelming bi-partisan support.

Abortion rates have been declining over the past thirty years.  Directly following the passing of Roe v. Wade, 30 of every 1000 women were having abortions.  Today that number has fallen to 19.  What's even more interesting is the abortion rate experienced its sharpest decline during the Clinton Administration (from 25 to 20 abortions per thousand) and has been relatively flat ever since.  Data suggests abortion rates correlate to the economic conditions of the US (and not who is president).  When the economy is tough, the abortion rate rises as couples rethink their choices about having children, given the financial pressures that raising children bring.

Improving economic conditions is not the only lever to drive down abortion cases.  In 2006 Governor Romney passed a statewide health reform that contracted private insurance companies to provide care for the state's uninsured.  Directly following the implementation of the law, the state's abortion rate declined.  The thinking behind this is that expanding healthcare led to greater doctor access, who then could deliver education and access to contraceptives.  Brian Fung of The Atlantic wrote extensively about the Massachusetts findings and made the same argument for the Affordable Health Care Act.

I am quite aware of President Obama's pro-choice stance, but like his Republican counterparts, his position is empty rhetoric.  President Obama has not signed one piece of legislation or a solitary executive order that expands access to abortion in the US.  In fact, the only abortion-related executive order he has signed denied using federal funds to pay for abortions.  President Obama has passed a significant healthcare bill that makes access to doctors easier for millions of Americans.

When my Republican friends come and lecture me why I should support their pro-life candidates due to moral obligations, I quickly ask what impact will the candidates have on legislating abortion?  Until a reasonable response is articulated, I will continue to vote for the man who made access to contraceptives and doctors available for 20 million additional women.

President Obama's recent announcement of his support for gay marriage sparked a firestorm of debate across the country. For Mormon Democrats such as myself, it has put us at odds with Obama on an important social issue.

In Support of Traditional Marriage

As a Latter-Day Saint, I believe in traditional marriage. I believe, as the Proclamation on the Family states, that "marriage between man and woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator's plan for the eternal destiny of His children." I do not support the right to gay marriage or attempts to redefine traditional marriage for society at large. Ultimately, I believe that the only form of marriage recognized beyond the grave is the one that is performed in sacred LDS temples. All other marriages end at death: “ 'till death do us part." In that sense, the religious debate over gay marriage is somewhat moot for Latter-Day Saints. While social conservatives often see the push for gay marriage as a threat to traditional families, I have never felt that my own traditional marriage and family were threatened by the prospect of gay marriage. As an American who cherishes individual liberty, I do not concern myself with the lifestyle arrangements of others.