US Supreme Court to rule on same-sex"marriage"

CrewDog · Jul 9, 2015

It didn't take long. I have no doubt that the Militant Gay Radicals and their shyster lawyers ... probably in collusion with the Department of Just-Us, "Civil Rights" Division ...had all the legal attack angles figured out long before the SCOTUS Decree came out!

"For Churches That Won’t Perform Same-Sex Weddings, Insurance Begins to Look Iffy"
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/420928/churches-gay-marriage-insurance

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

Andy3 · Jul 9, 2015

This seems to be all a part of God's providence. Let the churches lose their tax exempt status and then the world can see what they have done by realizing all that the Christian world does for humanity and society. All the good works done in the name of the Lord, education, health, the poor etc. Is this not all part of God's plan to pull down the veil on the world and show them that their wicked choices has far more consequences than people are thinking.

earthtoangels · Jul 14, 2015

padraig said: ↑

In fact, Kennedy develops the argument that, because society has allowed same-sex couples to adopt children, it must now allow those same-sex couples to "marry" in order that their adopted children not be "stigmatized" as being part of a "lesser" type of family.

Kennedy writes: "As all parties agree, many same-sex couples provide loving and nurturing homes to their children, whether biological or adopted. And hundreds of thousands of children are presently being raised by such couples... Most States have allowed gays and lesbians to adopt, either as individuals or as couples, and many adopted and foster children have same-sex parents. This provides powerful confirmation from the law itself that gays and lesbians can create loving, supportive families. Excluding same-sex couples from marriage thus conflicts with a central premise of the right to marry. Without the recognition, stability, and predictability marriage offers, their children suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser. They also suffer the significant material costs of being raised by unmarried parents, relegated through no fault of their own to a more difficult and uncertain family life. The marriage laws at issue here thus harm and humiliate the children of same-sex couples."

What about the religious beliefs of those who, in conscience, do not believe that a same-sex "marriage" is a real marriage? Will these religious beliefs still be protected by the Constitution, under the clause proclaiming freedom of religion?

Kennedy says yes, religious freedom in this sense will be protected. "Finally, it must be emphasized that religions, and those who adhere to religious doctrines, may continue to advocate with utmost, sincere conviction that, by divine pre- cepts, same-sex marriage should not be condoned. The First Amendment ensures that religious organizations and persons are given proper protection as they seek to teach the principles that are so fulfilling and so central to their lives and faiths, and to their own deep aspirations to continue the family structure they have long revered. The same is true of those who oppose same-sex marriage for other reasons. In turn, those who believe allowing same-sex marriage is proper or indeed essential, whether as a matter of religious conviction or secular belief, may engage those who disagree with their view in an open and searching debate. The Constitution, however, does not permit the State to bar same-sex couples from marriage on the same terms as accorded to couples of the opposite sex."

However, there are many observers who are persuaded that religious beliefs opposed to same-sex "marriage" will increasingly be stigmatized in the US and soon, in some form or other, repressed, as the consequences of this new acceptance of same-sex marriage unfold.

In that sense, a decision that claims to offer new "freedom" to a certain class of citizens will, many believe, inevitably take away "freedom" from another category of citizens.

========================================

Now what?

All of us living in this age are at a disadvantage in attempting to judge the meaning and consequences of this decision.

So what follows are necessarily preliminary and inadequate observations.

First, the very fact that the vote was not unanimous, but 5 to 4, means that there is self-evidently room to oppose this decision, as four of the Supreme Court justices themselves did oppose it. And if a 5th had done so, it would have been defeated.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. all dissented. (Each wrote separate opinions.)

Roberts wrote: "This universal definition of marriage as the union of a man and a woman is no historical coincidence. Marriage did not come about as a result of a political movement, discovery, disease, war, religious doctrine, or any other moving force of world history -- and certainly not as a result of a prehistoric decision to exclude gays and lesbians. It arose in the nature of things to meet a vital need: ensuring that children are conceived by a mother and father committed to raising them in the stable conditions of a lifelong relationship." And he cites the Roman statesman, Marcus Tullius Cicero, De Officiis 57: “For since the reproductive instinct is by nature’s gift the common possession of all living creatures, the first bond of union is that between husband and wife; the next, that between parents and children; then we find one home, with everything in common.”

This means that there are strong arguments against this decision, which four of the justices found compelling, and led them to oppose this decision.

Second, just as in the vote approving "gay marriage" in Ireland in May, there are clearly two profoundly different evaluations of what is the key issue in this matter which lead to two entirely different conclusions by those having to judge the matter -- by the Supreme Court Justices, by politicians and statesmen, and by citizens in general, that is, by each of us.

Some people regard the key issue as one of "civil rights"; other people regard the key issue as one of "self-evident natural law."

Those who regard marriage as a matter of "civil rights" -- who appear now to be a majority on the United States, and throughout Western Europe (a recent Washington Post-ABC poll showed 61 percent of Americans say they support same-sex marriage) -- regard today's decision as "an historic victory for gay rights." For such people, homosexual or lesbian couples should be allowed to marry because marriage is a "civil right" that should no longer be reserved only for heterosexual couples.

But for traditional Christians and Jews, and Muslims, and for many others as well, the definition of "marriage" necessarily includes a component of sexual complementarity. For them, a marriage cannot exist where there is not a "man" and a "woman." For them, biological procreation is a constitutive element of "marriage," leading to children connected biologically to their parents, generated by a "father" and a "mother" and so becoming biological "sons" and "daughters." For them, these truths are self-evident.

The country’s first legally recognized same-sex marriages took place just 11 years ago, in 2004.

==========================
Click to expand...

And as expected this decision is having repercussions for the good order of many foundational institutions of our nation:

Pentagon announces plan aimed at lifting transgender ban

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150714/us--military-transgender-58f13d0c01.html

The latest Pentagon move comes just weeks after the Supreme Court upheld the right of same-sex couples to marry.

garabandal · Jul 14, 2015

earthtoangels said: ↑

And as expected this decision is having repercussions for the good order of many foundational institutions of our nation:

Pentagon announces plan aimed at lifting transgender ban

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150714/us--military-transgender-58f13d0c01.html
The latest Pentagon move comes just weeks after the Supreme Court upheld the right of same-sex couples to marry.
Click to expand...

Can you imagine this lot facing ISIS?

They would run away from the enemy just in the same way they have run away from their true sex.

garabandal · Jul 14, 2015

Andy3 said: ↑

This seems to be all a part of God's providence. Let the churches lose their tax exempt status and then the world can see what they have done by realizing all that the Christian world does for humanity and society. All the good works done in the name of the Lord, education, health, the poor etc. Is this not all part of God's plan to pull down the veil on the world and show them that their wicked choices has far more consequences than people are thinking.
Click to expand...

Andy - what you have posted is not only true but prophetic.

We are going to see evil grow and be exposed so that Christians will once again become the salt and the light.

But also the martyrs of the end of times.

CrewDog · Jul 14, 2015

earthtoangels said: ↑

And as expected this decision is having repercussions for the good order of many foundational institutions of our nation:

Pentagon announces plan aimed at lifting transgender ban

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150714/us--military-transgender-58f13d0c01.html
The latest Pentagon move comes just weeks after the Supreme Court upheld the right of same-sex couples to marry.
Click to expand...

...... and ... Get a load of this!! ....At a time when the USA Military is worn out and suffering low morale and being cut to pre-WWII levels .... scarce $$$$ will, doubtless, be used for this:
http://www.breitbart.com/national-s...nder-transition-if-transgender-ban-is-lifted/

GOD SAVE THE REPUBLIC AND ALL CHRISTENDOM!!

padraig · Jul 14, 2015

CrewDog · Jul 14, 2015

[quote="padraig, post: 92954, member: 2"[/quote]
The same people that say there is nothing wrong with the Gay Agenda are the same people who will tell you that Abortion is a "Woman's Health Issue" and Drug Dealers are "Non-Violent" .. Excuse Me!! .. Shredding 5000 years of Judeo-Christian Belief, ripping children out of their mother's wombs and selling a substance that destroys people's minds, livelihoods and families is not violence!! Worldwide Satanic Evil-n-Madness on Parade ... "Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter."
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2...ma-just-pardoned-bunch-coke-daniel-greenfield

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!!

padraig · Jul 14, 2015

CrewDog said: ↑

[quote="padraig, post: 92954, member: 2"
Click to expand...

The same people that say there is nothing wrong with the Gay Agenda are the same people who will tell you that Abortion is a "Woman's Health Issue" and Drug Dealers are "Non-Violent" .. Excuse Me!! .. Shredding 5000 years of Judeo-Christian Belief, ripping children out of their mother's wombs and selling a substance that destroys people's minds, livelihoods and families is not violence!! Worldwide Satanic Evil-n-Madness on Parade ... "Woe to you that call evil good, and good evil: that put darkness for light, and light for darkness: that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter."
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2...ma-just-pardoned-bunch-coke-daniel-greenfield

GOD SAVE ALL HERE!![/quote]

A good scripture quote

miker · Aug 14, 2015

The US judicial system has become a colossal farce. This decision in Colorado is just so wrong. This man's right to freely practice his religion and exercise his free speech rights is according to the court trumped by the so called right to non-discrimination. In essence the court says sure you can believe whatever you want, but you can't act on it.

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2015/08/13/gay-couple-wins-wedding-cake-court-of-appeals-ruling/

mothersuperior7 · Sep 13, 2015

miker · Sep 13, 2015

Read this story today. An Office Depot refused to copy a prayer to end abortion because they deemed it an attack on abortion providers! Yet, a bake shop that refused to make a cake for a gay couple is fined out if existence. It's just all gone nuts!

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/09/12/office-depot-apologizes-to-woman-over-anti-abortion-fliers/

Praetorian · Sep 13, 2015

miker said: ↑

Read this story today. An Office Depot refused to copy a prayer to end abortion because they deemed it an attack on abortion providers! Yet, a bake shop that refused to make a cake for a gay couple is fined out if existence. It's just all gone nuts!

http://www.pressherald.com/2015/09/12/office-depot-apologizes-to-woman-over-anti-abortion-fliers/
Click to expand...

I think the time when "justice" had true meaning is swiftly passing. Don't count on it anymore. Even secularists agree that Christians are entering an era of persecution.

"A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him saying, 'You are mad, you are not like us'."

~ St Antony of Egypt

Log in or Sign up

US Supreme Court to rule on same-sex"marriage"

CrewDog Guest

Andy3 Powers

earthtoangels Guest

garabandal Powers

garabandal Powers

CrewDog Guest

padraig Powers

CrewDog Guest

padraig Powers

miker Powers

mothersuperior7 Powers

miker Powers

Praetorian Powers

Share This Page