June 26, 2015

IRD: Supreme Court Marriage Ruling ‘Fashion Over Law’

Institute on Religion and Democracy Press Release
June 26, 2015
Contact: Jeff Walton office: 202-682-4131, cell: 202-413-5639, e-mail: jwalton@TheIRD.org

“There are no winners, and the biggest losers are children in America who are the chief victims of the breakdown of marriage and family.”
-Mark Tooley, IRD President

Washington, DC—Justices of the United States Supreme Court have recognized a Constitutional right to marriage between couples of the same sex. Ruling 5-4 in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, justices this morning overturned same-sex marriage bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. The ruling mandates that same-sex marriage be imposed in all 14 states that recognize marriage as exclusively a union between one man and one woman, while reaffirming the other states where courts have overturned state laws.

IRD President Mark Tooley commented:

“As in other infamous politicized rulings, the Supreme Court has chosen fashion over law.  There are no winners, and the biggest losers are children in America who are the chief victims of the breakdown of marriage and family.

“As The Church has for 42 years rallied ongoing resistance to the court’s Roe vs. Wade invention of a right to unrestricted abortion, so now The Church must resist the court’s attempt to claim authority over the definition of marriage.

“The coming decades offer the opportunity for Christians and other traditionalists to help revive marriage and family as increasing numbers of Americans suffer the consequences of radical secularist assaults on both.

“Now is not the time for despair, retreat or anger. The court’s arrogance should be mocked, and The Church should declare that, in a free society, appointed judges don’t have power over what is eternally rooted in creation.”


45 Responses to IRD: Supreme Court Marriage Ruling ‘Fashion Over Law’

  1. Reason0verhate says:

    Odd that no one recognized this “right” until homosexuals started parading their perversion in public.

    Five old fools in black robes override common sense, biology, and the will of voters. If this isn’t judicial tyranny, what is? They’re imposing their morality – rather, immorality – on the rest of us, and the main victims will be children. Homosexuals can be proud, marriage is further degraded than it already was. Instead of raising themselves up to be respectable, they’ve worked hard to drag respectable people down to their level.

    • Ron Baker says:

      Just say : by the power of the state that forces me , I now pronounce you MAN AND WIFE.

    • MarcoPolo says:

      Funny, my father used to say the same thing about Blacks demanding equality. Was he wrong to believe that EVERY American deserves equality? Should our fellow african-american brethren not have paraded for their cause?
      This issue is not the end of Marriage as the Traditionalists fear. It is simply a monumental decision in favor of freedom and equality for all!

      • Asemodevs says:

        Oh, give it a rest – “they’re the same as blacks.”

      • Terry Lee says:

        There is a wide gap between a race (outside your control) and a behavior (inside your control). Being of a different race is not a morality issue, but homosexuality is. And it is not the end of marriage, but a radical redefinition that will have negative affects on our culture, as has the breakdown of the family in cultures throughout history. And when the SCOTUS violates their responsibilities and the US Constitution to wrangle this decision, we have lost. Culture has overcome the rule of law.

      • Richard Kurtz says:

        Totally agree.

    • Richard Kurtz says:

      63% of Americans support the supreme court. Instead of blaiming the gays we should be looking at our churches to see why we can only keep 1 out of 2 straights married for more than 5 yrs. Address the problem and he is us.

  2. Mark Brooks says:

    I agree that now is the time for action, but we need to do just that, act. Abortion and now legalized sodomy. It has to end.

    Because if the political process fails, the other options are to varying degrees unpalatable, most unpalatable of all mere surrender.

    We need to stop being polite. We need to be radical, and to demand from the politicians we support concrete actions towards the goal of reversal. No action? No vote. No money. And perhaps we can ramp up non-cooperation with an increasingly tyrannical government. Because the truth is that the U.S. Government as a whole, and the Supreme Court as much as any of it, has been violating the fundamental law of the land for decades.

    In politics, the side that is persistent and ruthless wins. That’s just the way it is in this sinful world. So we must be ruthless and persistent. The time for polite discussions with the enemy is over.

    • MarcoPolo says:

      Yeah, that’s what we need…radical, ruthless reactionaries!
      And for what? So that the newly established liberties can be rescinded by those who feel they own marriage?!
      Perhaps one should start by restricting Celebrity marriages? Wouldn’t that be a start?

      • Terry Lee says:

        So you are okay with anarchy? If not, then where do you draw you morality and ethics necessary for law and order? Freedom is not unrestricted behavior. Freedom with out a moral center is a form of tyranny. “We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion . . . Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.” John Adams

        “Religion and morality are the essential pillars of civil society.” George Washington

        “[O]nly a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters.” Benjamin Franklin

        “Whereas true religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness . . . it is hereby earnestly recommended to the several States to take the most effectual measures for the encouragement thereof.” Continental Congress, 1778

        • MarcoPolo says:

          I have never, and will never advocate for Anarchy!
          If you think my goal is for such disarray, then you don’t understand my position.

          Morality is attainable through reasoning and compassion. These traits aren’t exclusive to only those who practice a religion. Even the Barbarians had a faith that they followed.

          Famous last words: “We have God on our side!”
          Yeah, right!

  3. MarcoPolo says:

    How does one revive Marriage?
    This Supreme Court decision finally affirms what the majority of Americans have been praying for…Equality!

    • Asemodevs says:

      Who knows? Elderly homosexuals marry women because they know their male sex partners will not take care of them in their old age. Very degrading.

      • MarcoPolo says:

        Where do you find evidence of that occurring?
        My Gay and Lesbian friends aren’t abandoning one another for what you think is security.
        They now have the same rights and responsibilities as every married couple.

  4. Pudentiana says:

    What we must do is to carry on with Christian marriage. No church should even consider changing the definition of marriage. Might I add, we should not be cowed by this decision. There will most certainly be much litigation leveled against people of faith who refuse to “celebrate” the new fad of same sex marriage, but we can expect this fad will pass like zoot suits and gold fish swallowing. Christians will have to take the whole “marriage” thing more seriously and reconsider more carefully how one chooses a mate. The wheat and the tares will become evident. It will be ugly, but then sin always is.

    • MarcoPolo says:

      I can’t see any change necessary for most churches except for renting their Sanctuaries, or Fellowship Halls. That’s not really “participating”!
      Surely, each Christian will still follow their heart and conscience for themselves. They just won’t be invited to, or attending any LGBT weddings.

      Otherwise, no change required. Oh, wait! TOLERANCE of our brethren. Yes, THAT might be required of all who call themselves members of a religious faith.

      • Pudentiana says:

        No Christian should follow their heart and conscience. This is the observation of someone who does not know Christ. One follows Christ. He has spoken as the Father told Him and the Scripture is a solid and material guide for those who want to see His Word. Tolerance is not what one does with sin. One resists sin.

        • MarcoPolo says:

          I stand corrected. I guess I thought if a person was of good conscience, and had a true heart, they would be good to go!
          I keep forgetting that Christians are guided by the Bible. Duh! My bad!

          • Mark Brooks says:

            Why would you forget? You are on this site often enough, by now, that I think you know MarcoPolo. If you want to understand Christians, you have to read the Bible, and take it for what it says.

            Is your semi-Buddhism not sufficient? You comment here frequently. Is it that you fear Christians? Is it that you can’t get the God of the Christians out of your head? You say you have Christian family, MarcoPolo, but I wonder, really, how much of truth you have disclosed about yourself. After all, you post under a pseudonym.

            You clearly have some reason for being here. Are you just blowing raspberries? Trolling is a nasty business, if that is the only reason you are posting.

          • MarcoPolo says:

            Dear Mark Brooks,
            My upbringing was thoroughly Christian, as I was a member of the United Methodist Church. Being an Acolyte, Choir member, UMYF participant, Methodist Mens Fellowship, etc.. I fully understand the faith and dogma of that particular denomination.

            After living on this planet for sixty years, and studying the dynamics of Life’s wondrous marvels, I’ve come to realize there are too many “Religions” that seem structured to separate people from one another, and I’ve been raised to be more accepting of those who are different than the “norm”. For which I make no apology.

            My interest in Religion and it’s vagaries is what brings me back to this, and other similar sites.
            The desire to better understand HOW, and WHY people think the way they do, is at the root of my quest.

            I’ve already been chastised for revealing too much personal information, so I doubt that you’re looking for me to add more to that.

            Strangely, there is another person who occasionally posts here that has my given name, Mark Bell, (see, I have nothing to hide!) But THAT Mark Bell, is diametrically opposite in his positions. MarcoPolo is my nickname.

            I hope I’ve been open enough to satisfy your inquisition. I do find your exchanges to be enlightening, and I hope you understand that my sole interest is to better understand WHY we humans can see things so differently, while knowing full well that we must all coexist on what is fast becoming a very small planet.


          • Mark Brooks says:

            Being a Methodist isn’t quite the same thing as being a Christian. There are lots of people who belong to churches, participate in activities, even learn a little of the theology of their particular institutional religion, but they don’t really believe in any of it. A new word has been coined for this — “cultural Christianity”. This is particularly true of religions that you can be “born into”. Even though you may have participated in Methodism in the UMC, I’m not persuaded that you actually know what it means to be a Christian. That’s fine, because that’s an ignorance that can be cured, IF you are willing. And really, it isn’t up to me.

            Now, as to why humans can “see things so differently”.

            It is true that we are all one race.

            “And Man called his wife’s name Eve; because she is the mother of all living.” — Genesis 3:20

            But we have had divisions almost from the first, and those divisions have led to murder, deceptions and lies.

            “And Cain spoke to Abel his brother, and it came to pass when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him. And Jehovah said to Cain, Where is Abel thy brother? And he said, I know not, am I my brother’s keeper?” — Genesis 4:8-9.

            So, why?

            “And the serpent said to the woman, Ye will not certainly die; but God knows that in the day ye eat of it, your eyes will be opened, and ye will be as God, knowing good and evil. And the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a pleasure for the eyes, and the tree was to be desired to give intelligence; and she took of its fruit, and ate, and gave also to her husband with her, and he ate. And the eyes of them both were opened, and they knew that they were naked.” — Genesis 3:5-7

            Thus came sin into God’s perfect creation, and with sin, death, and separation from God. And since God is the source of all knowledge, to be separated from God is to be separated from the one source of truth.

            That’s why Jesus came, to provide reconciliation of man to God. That is why Jesus said that he was Truth and Light. Do you see?

            “For I am not ashamed of the glad tidings; for it is God’s power to salvation, to very one that believes, both to Jew first and to Greek: for righteousness of God is revealed therein, on the principle of faith, to faith: according as it is written, But the just shall live by faith. For there is revealed wrath of God from heaven upon all impiety, and unrighteousness of men hold the truth in unrighteousness. Because what is known of God is manifest among them, for God has manifested it to them, — for from the world’s creation the invisible things of him are perceived, being apprehended by the mind through the things that are made, both his eternal power and divinity, — so as to render them inexcusable. Because, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but fell into folly in their thoughts, and their heart without understanding was darkened; professing themselves to be wise, the became fools and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of an image of corruptible man and of birds and quadrupeds and reptiles.” — Romans 1:16-23.

            If the light of the eye is darkness, how great is that darkness! Do you see? Separation from God means that a sinful humanity, already in rebellion, turned to things of their own imagining. Why did the Buddha turn against the Vedic religion of his day? Because he knew it was nonsense — Gautama was an agnostic and a practical nihilist, though he expressed those ideas in Vedic language rather than the language of modern rationalism. But he simply created another kind of nonsense. The blind lead the blind, and both fall into the ditch. My suggestion to you would be, don’t follow the blind.

            You won’t have your questions answered by studying humanity. You will only discern darkness. Things are only made clear by the light. So Juicy Ecumenism probably isn’t the best site for you to obtain the clarity you need, because this isn’t really a place for answering the kind of questions you are asking. I’m not the best teacher either, I’m not really experienced in answering those kinds of questions.

            Ultimately, Holy Spirit convicts of truth, so without Christ, you won’t get the answers you seek, or at least you won’t find them convincing. However, there are websites and books that answer some of the questions you are asking. The fundamental book is the Bible, but only a Christian can get its full value, and only then after study. That doesn’t mean your questions can’t be answered, though you should always check those answers against scripture, like the wise Bereans.

            However, this isn’t really the place you are likely to get those answers, and most of your posts seem polemical, and I doubt that will be helpful to you. Better that you go and ask questions of those who seek to give an answer to non-believers in Christ, because that’s where you will get your answers about some of these fundamental questions regarding the state of humanity. Answers in Genesis, the Berean Call — there are many such places.

          • MarcoPolo says:

            Thanks for extending such depth in your response.
            I would agree that Methodism is kind of “Middle of the road” in it’s orthodoxy, but nonetheless, it is a Christian denomination, and I was subjected to it from birth, to about the time I left College.

            I don’t ever intend to sound mean spirited, and I don’t think I have in any of my comments here. Therefore, with an open mind, and sincere heart, I will probably always listen-in to what Juicy Ecumenism has to say.

            If I can’t find people of faith to answer my questions about their religion, why would I ask someone outside of the faith?

            I admit, I do come off a bit polemic, but everybody is seeking knowledge, and I will not cease to ask. Much like Diogenes, I’m on a quest.

            Thanks for your Biblical notations, but I must say, I don’t find those passages to mean what many believe them to mean.
            Too many interpretive nuances, and NO accommodation to scientific fact for me to abide by. No offense intended, just that I’m not as absolute about that book as you are.

            No doubt you’ve heard of the late James Campbell, and Alan Watts? Both men, well versed in the Hindu and Buddhist “religions”, they have described for my understanding, the many foibles of Man and Religion, and thus, I have divorced myself from the other Abrahamic religions.

            I can’t turn my back on the Gaia Theory in all good conscience, so I’m finding Pantheism as a more direct correlation between Man, the Natural world,
            and Spirit.
            So if I were to be labeled, that would be it… Pantheist!


          • Mark Brooks says:

            Since you won’t believe God — and He did go to some trouble so we could have the Bible — you won’t get an answer to your questions that comes from anywhere than your own head. If you are satisfied with your own wisdom, so be it, but then, why bother seeking anything here?

            As for scientific “facts” — there aren’t very many of those, it seems science is always changing, which makes for a curiously flexible notion of truth. Confirmation bias, hidden presuppositions — really, none of that has changed since the Greeks. I’m not very impressed. The people who fall to scientism are the same people who fell to Greek philosophy, Eastern mysticism, and a hundred other ways of denying God. Many people are so impressed with our present, that when they find things from the past, buried in mud and even rock, that contradict modern conceits, they are attributed to fraud or simply ignored. Contradictions are covered up. Anomalous things are smoothed over. That’s not new either. The Bible only contradicts scientific fact for people who are determined to deny it. Answers in Genesis and other apologetics organizations have been demonstrating that for years.

            Being anti-Christian simply makes it clear that what matters to you isn’t what you believe, which is vague, but what you don’t believe, which is Christianity. Why so much effort at denying Christianity? Aren’t you a little curious about your own focus? After all, if Christianity and the Bible are just nonsense and myths, why spend so much time with it? It isn’t seeking understanding, because you avoid that which would give you understanding. Interpretive nuances? Read it plainly. That’s the real problem, isn’t it? It isn’t that you don’t know what it says. It is that you won’t believe what it says.

            In any event, I don’t think further communication, at least from me, is useful. I hope that someday you, like other unbelievers, will have the conviction of the Spirit. Because the time is short.

          • MarcoPolo says:

            Science isn’t the enemy of the Bible. It is just the study of things yet fully known. If that contradicts Scripture, or even fortifies it, it really doesn’t matter. A moot point.
            I’m never sated with what is in my own mind. That is why I question everything! This life is so fascinating and intriguing that there is never enough knowledge to satisfy my thirst for the Truth! (I’m aware that that word: TRUTH has different connotations to many people. But that’s another conversation.

            For the record, I don’t hate or deny Christianity. It’s just not my choice when it comes to religions.

            And as for GOD’s efforts for us to have the Bible…I’m not clear on what He actually did?

            I don’t deny that there is a God, I just don’t pray or worship the one that Christians identify with. Nobody has definitively proven that there even IS a God. No problem there!

            God is a psychological state of mind that is ushered in differing directions by each religion and their respective tenets.

            For instance, how does a Christian reconcile their faith with our Jewish brethren? Sure, the same Abrahamic origins, but a wholly different approach to the divine and redemption.

            If you feel our exchanges have run their course, and there is nothing left to debate, I’ll understand. But your cogent responses are exactly the vigor I enjoy in any conversation.

            Again, Thanks!

          • Pudentiana says:

            Mark Brooks explained in his earlier post the necessity of becoming born again by the Holy Spirit of the Trinity. It is a work of God which recreates your spiritual being. Until that happens, one is doomed to fail to see or understand the Truth which is in Christ. No intellect can discern it. It is supernatural. I hope you keep seeking for this Truth and are open to the regeneration of the Holy Spirit. Pax.

          • Pastorsmate says:

            You’re not “as absolute about that book” as another person posting here is? I’m on here for the first time, so I don’t know what your view of Jesus might be. If you do happen to believe that He was & is the Son of God, and that as He said, He is God (“I and My Father are one.”). Jesus Himself believed (Matthew 5:18) that “every jot and tittle” of Scripture was correct, divinely inspired, and holds true permanently. Current English translations of the words “jot and tittle” are “smallest letter or least stroke of a pen”. In Matthew 5:18 (above), He said, “Until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.” By “Law” He referred to Scripture; “law” in that sense, at that time, referred to all the Scripture that existed in its entirety. And by “until everything is accomplished, He was referring to the end of time.
            Would the opinion of God Himself (expressed through Jesus, in an earthly conversation) that Scripture in its entirety is true, help you to consider it in a more “absolute” light? I consider it as such, since I would not dare to count myself more knowledgeable about Scripture than Jesus, as Lord and God Himself. I hope maybe this helps in your search for understanding.

          • MarcoPolo says:

            Thank you Pastorsmate, for your sincere approach to this subject, and my salvation.
            It should satisfy your suggestion, to learn that I have read the Bible (numerous times, and for many years!), and you are partly right, it does contain some truth! At least the parts that are true!

            But when you realize just how that Book was compiled, it just doesn’t stand up to Historical inspection as to Natural phenomenon (ie: Floods, Plagues, Cosmological events, and such.)
            Considering how much time passed between Jesus’ thirty-three years on Earth, and the first compilation of the Bible’s stories and testimonies, it just flies in the face of common sense.

            If the Bible is meant to be a guide for humans to live by, I think it does as good a job as the Quaran or the Torah. But to believe it’s entire content without question, is blatantly dangerous to rational thought.

            Most of my family are Christians. The Bible kind.
            I love and respect their views, just as I respect yours. No problem whatsoever. Live and let live!

            I hope I’ve better described my position on this subject, and I hope you’ll know, that I appreciate your position on it as well? But I am satisfied with my open-minded Liberal view of Life and Humanity as it is. ….Thank you!

            You only get one shot at this life, and since nobody comes out of it alive, I’m doing my best to contribute to life’s virtues in service to mankind as a citizen of the World, and not a Religious Nationalist from one Country that thinks it has God on it’s side.

            Welcome to Juicy Ecumenism!
            I think you’ll find cogent conversations, as well as some flighty nonsense as well! But THAT’S Life!


          • Straight Shooter says:

            What a crock. Homosexuals never read the Bible.

          • MarcoPolo says:

            So you’re saying, none of your LGBT friends read the Bible? Why?

          • Richard Kurtz says:

            Since you don’t kno Marco Polo I suggest that as a Christian, you refrain from judging him. That is God’s job.

          • Mark Brooks says:

            But you are qualified to judge me, yes? An amusing conundrum you’ve created for yourself.

      • Straight Shooter says:

        Homosexuals are NOT “brethren” of Christians, “brethren” means “fellow Christians.”

        • MarcoPolo says:

          It also means our fellow Human Beings.

          No Religion owns language, but some prefer to isolate language to mean something exclusive. To me, that smacks of arrogance.

          I’m not suggesting that our Gay and Lesbian brothers and sisters will be on your Christmas card list. I’m just extolling the virtues of having a populace that is at least now, more equal in Law.

    • Richard Kurtz says:

      Well put.

  5. Beau Jackson says:

    Amazing that two men who split the utility bills are now given the dignity of “marriage.” Anthony Kennedy has much to answer for.

  6. Diaris says:

    If people are so insecure about themselves that they’ve been on pins and needles awaiting the word from five judges, they’re still going to be insecure. The only way homosexuals could ever gain self-respect would be to turn from that degraded lifestyle completely and start a new life. There aren’t many ex-gays, but there are some, and what a pity their stories are not told more often. Men who degrade themselves and each other will never fully be at peace with themselves, and the possession of a piece of paper won’t change athing.

    • Charles Horton says:

      Very well said, Diaris. Homosexuals base their choice on instant gratification and freedom from consequences of their actions, i. e. no children. The natural order created by God of male and female coming together to create children and families, the building blocks of all civil societies, is known by everyone, including all same sex-attracted people. But practicing homosexuals don’t care even though they know this. And they will remain insecure, continually seeking some new knowledge or societal change to help them feel better about themselves. Five lawyers in black robes making a decision that supports their desires of the moment will not change their insecurity, and so they will continue to force more unhealthy societal change because they think it will make them feel better. E.g. now they want for children, children mind you, to be forced to contemplate what gender they feel they are regardless of the equipment God has given them. Because of decisions by horribly deceived individuals in positions of high authority, like the SCOTUS 5, we are on the road to creating an entire populace mentally unsure of themselves who will seek yet more changes in order to make themselves feel better about themselves. At the rate we are going, a thoroughly corrupt society is not far away. The solution is to turn back to God, and to start believing what he says to us about how we should live, and to change and start living it. He is the one who has made us, and knows more than we do what is best for us. And he cares for us, having our best interest at heart. But the only way to really get this is to believe God’s words to us and acting them. So I urge any supporter of the homosexual movement to do just that, starting now.

  7. cri1000 says:

    Oops, you just slipped Mr. Marco. You just said we have to rent facilties to HS folks. Wrong sir. Not acceptable. I know you want to force god fearing people to acknowledge your vast intellectual superiority but I’m not buying your scams. You are doing the work of the devil and probably deny his existence or maybe you do. You preach Tolerance. I have seen tolerance in a Buddhist country where young children are sold by families into sexual slavery. But a moral relavatist such as thyself might not see anything wrong with that. I feel sorry for you and fear for your immortal soul. God help you.

  8. Certainly, no one is surprised by this decision by the Supreme Court. This was inevitable when the late 18th-century founders replaced the 17th-century governments of, by, and for God established upon His unchanging moral law for their own humanistic government of, by, and for the people based upon capricious Enlightenment and Masonic concepts.

    “The Bible stipulates, among other things, that judicial appointees must be men of truth who fear Yahweh and hate covetousness. (See Chapter 5 “Article 2: Executive Usurpation” for a list of additional Biblical qualifications.) The United States Constitution requires no Biblical qualifications whatsoever [made all but impossible by Article 6’s Christian test ban]. Nowhere does the Constitution stipulate that judges must rule on behalf of Yahweh, rendering decisions based upon His commandments, statutes, and judgments as required in Exodus 18. That not even one constitutional framer contended for Yahweh, as did King Jehoshaphat, speaks volumes about the framers’ disregard for Him and His judicial system:

    ‘And he [King Jehoshaphat] set judges in the land throughout all the fenced cities of Judah, city by city, and said to the judges, Take heed what ye do: for ye judge not for man, but for YHWH, who is with you in the judgment…. And he charged them, saying, Thus shall ye do in the fear of YHWH, faithfully, and with a perfect heart.’ (2 Chronicles 19:5-9)….”

    For more, see online Chapter 6 “Article 3: Judicial Usurpation” of “Bible Law vs. the United States Constitution: The Christian Perspective” at http://www.bibleversusconstitution.org/BlvcOnline/biblelaw-constitutionalism-pt6.html.

    Then find out how much you really know about the Constitution as compared to the Bible. Take our 10-question Constitution Survey in the right-hand sidebar and receive a complimentary copy of a book that examines the Constitution by the Bible.

    • Grundune says:

      So let me get this straight, Ted. The reason we have same sex marriage
      is because the Founding Fathers goofed. Can we blame Obama’s second
      election on them, too. How about abortion?

  9. MatWeller says:

    This Supreme Court decision is the proudest moment of American history in my lifetime. It’s supported by a vast majority of the public; it infringes on nobody’s rights; it gives a long-deserving mass of the population equal rights — everybody wins.

    • Mark Brooks says:

      So many words, but not one true assertion.

      • MatWeller says:

        Which assertion was problematic?

        “This Supreme Court decision is the proudest moment of American history in my lifetime.” This is my opinion, it’s inarguable.

        “It’s supported by a vast majority of the public” — polls put support for same sex marriage at somewhere between 59-63%, which is more than the percentage of the popular vote that Reagan got in either of his election wins that were widely regarded as “landslides.”

        “it infringes on nobody’s rights” — that’s just a fact. Nobody has to become gay as a result of this decision. No heterosexual marriages have to change one iota as a result of this decision. Nobody has to teach their kids not to hate their gay neighbors as a result of this decision. Nobody has to love their own gay children as a result of this decision. Nobody even has to bake a cake for their gay neighbors as a result of this decision. You don’t have to change one aspect of your life as a result of this decision save for the fact that it may lead to more TV programs that you want to avoid due to their lack of overt gay hatred, but that’s a company catering to the majority, not a direct result of this ruling.

        “it gives a long-deserving mass of the population equal rights” — also a fact. For as long as this country has existed, it has denied LEGAL recognition to same sex unions which as the SCOTUS declared in this decision is a clear violation of the 14th Amendment in repeated interpretations of its intent.

        People get hung up on the meaning of “marriage” in legal versus religious senses. They’re so different that they shouldn’t even be the same word. My wife and I got married by a pastor in a church because we valued God’s blessing on our union. We got a marriage license at the courthouse because law requires it for us to be able to bequeath our estates to each other in the event of our deaths and to be able to visit each other in the hospital and to file joint taxes and companies require it to share insurance and to adopt children and a hundred other mundane privileges that have nothing to do with God. Neither “marriage” requires the other. Religious marriage is spiritual and can only be given by God. State marriage is contractual, and as a state funded institution cannot be offered to some citizens and not others. That’s why churches cannot and will not be required to perform same sex marriage ceremonies, but courthouses will and should.

        So, I’m not sure which assertion troubled you, but hopefully this helps clarify. God bless you, brother.

  10. Unfortunately it’s more than just “gay marriage”, it is beginning of court appointed “rights” that will spread to ALL areas of Constitutional usurpation. The Bill of Rights will continually be eroded because of what is accepted purely due to politically correct interpretation of the elitist,secular judges appointed and not the original intent of the Founders ! Christian principles and tyranny do not and can not reconcile their belief systems. Under a more devious reasoning, communist infiltration of government has permitted the takeover of our three branch system and enabled 9 esteemed lawyers to impose ill-advised”liberty” to principles not intended in the document of our freedoms. Our Constitutional RIGHTS are eroding right before our eyes and the purveyors of secular,devious communism couldn’t be happier !!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *