Sam2,
Here is a small part of the OU’s statement:
“Ultimately, decisions on social policy remain with the democratic process, and today the process has spoken and we accord the process and its result the utmost respect.”
You posted that the OU’s statement was, in your view, perfect.
Would you say the same thing about that statement if the issue were, say, banning Shabbos observance, Bris Mila, private schools, or even all Torah learning?
For example, what if the “democratic process” decided that “social policy” requires all men, women and children to be michalel Shabbos and to disallow Bris Mila until the child becomes an adult and chooses then whether or not he wants a bris?
The last part of that quote from the OU is, in my opinion, at once the most troubling and also most revealing of OU Hashkafa.
I suspect that, as an MO organization, the OU must have a strong innate respect/desire for modernity.
Otherwise, who asked the OU to accord the “utmost respect” to this disastrous, anti-Torah result?
If you really wished to uphold the Torah’s honor, and, seemingly, if you actually believed the Torah’s morals are, lihavdil, above all others’, then you would write something else, like the following:
“…While we accord the process with the utmost respect, today’s result of that process, in the form of this ruling, is a tragic one for our morality and our nation.”
What a shame.