“Our families are the foundation of our country, and America is strongest when our nation’s families are sound,” says Ohio Congressman Jim Jordan. So why is it, then, that Representative Jordan wants to prevent people from getting married? Why is it that he wants to stop families that already exist from gaining sound legal footing for their status?

The sad reason is that Jim Jordan thinks that Americans can be divided into two unequal classes, with laws giving special privileges to the first class only, so that the second class is forced to live in the margins of society. The first class: Heterosexuals. The second class: Everyone else.

Opponents of marriage equality like Congressman Jordan often justify their position by stating that the idea of same-sex marriage isn’t popular among Americans. Of course, heterosexual couples never have to gain majority approval in an opinion poll of their peers in order to get married. Besides that, if majority support were the standard of what’s legal and ethical, then Jim Jordan’s own anti-equality legislation would have to be regarded as thoroughly unworthy.

Earlier this year, Jordan introduced legislation, H.R. 2608, that would impose the federal government’s will upon the local government of Washington D.C., in order to prevent marriage equality from gaining legal recognition there. D.C. residents overwhelmingly support same-sex marriage, and this week, legislation successfully passed the Washington D.C. City Council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary. It is soon to come up for a vote before the full Council. However, Jordan’s legislation would block this local legislation, forcing D.C. residents to adopt a ban on same-sex marriages that they do not believe in.

Marriage equality is the social norm in Washington D.C., with strong majority support. Why does Congressman Jordan want to impose contrary values on the district, using the power of the federal government to interfere?

If popularity is a measure of ethical and legal standing, then D.C. equality activists have strong standing. If popularity is the measure, then Jim Jordan’s bill has weak standing – it doesn’t even have the support of a quarter of the members of the House of Representatives.

Of course, popularity is not the American measure of ethical and legal standing. The Constitution is. For generations now, the Constitution of the United States of America has required that all Americans be given the status of equal protection under the law.