Not long ago I told you about the 13 states that are facing judicial efforts to redefine marriage. These are not ballot measures, these are not voter initiatives, these are judges deciding for an entire state to oppose the majority of the people of that state and force marriage redefinition on the state in some way.

Included in this list is:

Pennsylvania
Virginia
Oklahoma
Utah
Kentucky
Colorado
Oregon
Texas
Michigan
Tennessee
Indiana
Florida
Ohio

What is striking about each of these cases is the similarities, or relative similarities in each state. If you look closely at the list you will notice these are all predominantly conservative states. Each of these states embraces more traditional values and beliefs regarding a wide range of issues, including marriage. Each of these states tends to elect conservative leaders for both federal and state office. While certain exceptions exist these states are similar in their values, beliefs, politics, and governance.

I predicted that West Virginia would soon be added to this list. There is currently a lawsuit in federal court challenging the legality of West Virginia’s DOMA law. West Virginia doesn’t even have a constitutional amendment defining marriage because our lawmakers would not allow such an amendment to be added to the ballot in 2010 when it was requested. So the only thing preventing marriage from being redefined in West Virginia is our DOMA law, which is currently being challenged by several homosexual couples from Kanawha and Putnam counties. It’s only a matter of time before a federal judge redefines marriage for all of West Virginia unless the people pressure our lawmakers to take action. (Although, don’t count on Gov. Tomblin to sign any laws protecting marriage even if he does profess to be “pro-traditional marriage.” We see how his “pro-life” conviction worked out.)

While some judges, like the one in Ohio, have stayed their rulings pending the outcome of the appeals process, others have acted alone and trampled the will of the people in forcing marriage redefinition in a breach of trust and abuse of power.

Though the judge that ordered Indiana to recognize the marriage of a lesbian couple performed in Massachusetts, only ordered the state to recognize this one couple’s union, the precedent has been set that will no doubt result in the toppling of their marriage laws, unless action is taken to further strengthen the laws.

This trend in judicial activism is troubling for several reasons. First, judges should not act unilaterally to force actions that the majority are opposed to. There is a process the legal system takes that was designed specifically to prevent this very thing. Liberal judges are stepping outside the boundaries of their power to breach their position and power by making these rulings that violate state laws.

But consider also how arbitrary the Judges statement is. He said that Indiana attorneys defending the marriage laws haven’t “given a valid reason” for the ban and so he ruled in favor of the couple. To put this in perspective, this judge has allowed the emotional narrative of this couple to trump the law.

This favorite tactic of the liberal left is undeniable. They enjoy using emotional narrative and making others feel sorry for them. But the fact is the law is objective fact free from emotion. This is necessary to ensure the law is applied to everyone equally. Homosexuals are asking the courts to give them “a break” because of their sad sob story. This is not equality, this is emotional abuse.

The idea that this judge would say the attorney’s did not give a valid reason for defending the law is absurd. The only reason the attorney’s needed was to hold up the amendment passed by the vote of the people and say “here’s our reason.” The judges’ words are dangerous in that it makes the law not objective but arbitrary. What exactly is a valid reason to this judge? And who determines its validity?

Another state to add to this list is Georgia. Lambda Legal, a gay activist group is filing a lawsuit challenging Georgia’s marriage amendment and seeking to redefine marriage for the entire state.

This troubling trend is just one of many. The reality being created surrounding marriage in our country is that it is completely fluid and arbitrary arrangement in which details are solely dependent upon the individuals involved. It’s sort of the ultimate revenge for the spoiled kids raised in the last generation; they are, after all, more concerned with their own welfare than anyone else.

The height, to date, of this trending can be seen in a recent headline trumpeting the fact that a married lesbian trio are expecting their first child together.  The women, ranging in age from 27 to 34, had a specially crafted ceremony to ensure they were all legally married to one another. And now they have announced they will soon be mothers after undergoing IVF treatment.

Those of us that have spent the last few years talking about the “slippery slope” to marriage redefinition, only to be mocked for what liberals assured us would never happen, are taking no satisfaction in being right. The logical end to allowing emotional narrative and arbitrary laws to define our society has come full circle. We are seeing the end result of where an “anything goes” philosophy of marriage leads.

When marriage is redefined to mean anything, it doesn’t mean anything at all; it loses any and all coherent meaning. We are seeing an effort to remove all meaning to marriage so that every boundary, not just the gender boundary to marriage can be erased. Those that continue to deny there is a slippery slope here are lying to themselves. And those that continue to argue that redefining marriage “doesn’t hurt me” are equally deceived.

The bottom line is that marriage is being attacked from within and without. Those that support traditional marriage but are content to do nothing and say nothing are harming marriage from within by their inaction. The attacks from without are obvious and more overt but are only successful as a result of the inaction of traditional marriage defenders. The time for action is now.