When it comes to the ongoing campaign by elitist faction judges to impose the specious right of homosexuals to marry on the people of the United States, it’s especially important to note the use of the word “disparage” in the language of Article IX. People can argue, if they like, that the recognition of homosexual marriage in no way denies or interferes with the right of heterosexuals to marry. But the word “disparage” broadens the purview of the prohibition, to include anything that belittles, denigrates, deprecates or trivializes.
The institution of marriage involves not one but several instances of unalienable right including, but not limited to:
-The parental right of authority over biological offspring, arising from the natural responsibility to care for them;
-The intrinsic right of offspring to sustenance and care from their parents, arising from that same natural responsibility;
-The right of parents to assert familial belonging and defend the custody and care of children as their natural duty, over whom no others may assert any interfering authority inconsistent with the common interest of all in the well-being and safety of any and all human offspring, as it effects the perpetuation of the species as a whole, and the particular communities people form in order to secure it.