Posted on 03/27/2013 4:39:25 AM PDT by IbJensen
Supreme Court Decides Whether Of Not To Review Challenge Of California's Prop 8.
This week the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on same Californias Prop 8 and a section of the Defense of Marriage Act which deals with benefits for same sex couples. Same sex marriage is front and center once again and Ive heard some interesting arguments on how supporting government involvement in defining marriage is a conservative ideal. During the Sunday morning talk show circuit, former Bush communications adviser took the moderate position emerging within the GOP against American Values Gary Bauer. Nicole Wallace tried to argue that supporting marriage equality is a conservative position. No, it is not.
Ive never understood how anyone who spent the past four-plus years lamenting the size of government could then argue for its increase by inviting it into the discussion of marriage. We complain about government in health care, we complain about government in education, we complain about government regulating soft drink size, but suddenly some of us have no problem with more government in peoples relationships with one another. Marriage is a covenant between a man, woman, and God before God on His terms. It is a religious civil liberty, not a right granted by government. It should never have been regulated by government in the first place, and government shouldnt have an expanded reach in further regulating it now. There is no allowance constitutionally that invites our government to define the religious covenant of marriage.
Ive no issue with same sex couples entering into contractual agreements with each other or sharing benefits (the military decisions should be made by those with the credit of service day in and day out, not civilian advocacy groups). Isnt that the goal of this conflict? If so, to me, thats an issue separate from marriage. In suing over marriage itself one is demanding that God change His definition of the union between a man and a woman. If recognition of status, ease with other contractual obligations, and other issues are the issues, why the need to force people of faith to alter recognition of Gods Word on the matter? The people may bend as reeds to lawfare, but God will not. Frankly, I see no point in being on any side other than Gods on any matter, and God is more small government than any player in the scene.
In suing over marriage one is demanding that others modify their beliefs to accommodate another. Do not people of faith retain their First Amendment liberty of freedom of religion?
California voters in Prop 8 are awaiting to see if elections in their state matter. Advocacy groups vilified Mormons yet according to numerous local media reports based on exit polling data, black and latino communities provided key support in the passage of Prop 8. The left had a more difficult time vilifying these voting blocs because its harder to ask them for votes later. Despite democracy in our constitutional republic working as it should, voters were sued to have their votes in a taxpayer-paid-for election overturned. The gap in the door will widen for lawsuits if the goal of homogenization isnt realized. Prop 8 is just the beginning. Do you doubt?
Here are a few recent examples:
- Christian photographers Elane Photography in New Mexico were approached by a same sex couple looking to hire a wedding photographer. Elane Photography politely declined citing their Christian faith and were sued by the couple under the states anti-discriminatory laws, and won. In New Mexico you apparently have no right to your free expression and practice of faith any longer. (Read even more about this case here.)
- In Lexington, Kentucky, a t-shirt shop called Hands On Originals was approached by the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization about printing shirts for the group. The t-shirt company politely declined and even sought out quotes and gave the group referrals to other t-shirt printers along with comparable prices. They were promptly sued by the group under Lexingtons anti-discriminatory laws and forced to comply with a lengthy investigation. The citys power-drunk human rights commission said this:
Raymond Sexton, the executive director of the Human Rights Commission told Fox News that Hands On Originals will be required by law to participate in the investigation. We have subpoena power and have the backing of the law, he said. We are a law enforcement agency and people have to comply.
Leftist groups are trying to get the company evicted from their premises, the city now has school districts freezing their business with the privately owned company. Meanwhile, the owner of the company tried to defend his faith and decision in an op/ed in the paper.
- A Methodist church in New Jersey was sued for not offering its facility for use during same sex weddings. A judge ruled against them.
- A same sex couple from California sued a Hawaiian bed and breakfast privately owned by a Christian woman for not allowing them to rent a room. A bed and breakfast in Alton privately owned by a Christian couple was sued when they would not host a same sex civil union ceremony. Owners of a small, privately-owned inn in Vermont declined to host a same sex wedding reception due to their religious views and were sued. An employee of Allstate insurance wrote an essay online disagreeing with same sex marriage and was reportedly fired from his job as a result.
- Catholic Charities was barred from assisting in adoptions in Massachusetts, Washington DC, and Illinois and excluded from future contracts because they declined to consider same sex couples. Sorry kids, but the agenda impresarios need to make an example.
There are even more examples, some listed on this page, some not, as they are numerous. Pastors in Canada are already facing lawsuits for simply preaching about marriage from the Bible. Tolerance is demanded of Christians but in this pluralistic society, little, if any, tolerance is afforded to Christian beliefs. Christians arent the antagonists here, but they do seem to have fewer rights than those engaging in lawfare to bring about forced acceptance.
Really, this isnt about gay rights. The left doesnt give a damn about gay rights. Remember, it was the left that instituted Dont Ask Dont Tell and it was a Republican group that led the charge to repeal it. The left hasnt done anything for the gay community except to offer it lip service and inaction. While leftist groups fight for marriage equality the Obama administration makes marriage an economic hit with horrible policy. You got bait and switched, leftists! No, the left cares nothing for gay rights, but theyll pretend to if they can use the bloc as a wedge to pry the populace from the influence of the church. Why? because its easier to convince people that their civil liberties fall under the dominion of man, of government, if the church is portrayed as inept and anachronistic. This is the entire goal. Once man, sinful, awful man controls your rights, your existence as an individual ends and your life as a statist serf begins.
So no, marriage equality is emphatically not a conservative value or tactic. Anything where the solution is an invitation for government intervention should be viewed with utmost suspicion.
***Marriage was hardly invented in Europe.****
I was trying (very poorly) to emphasize the ceremonial rituals and public recording of the bonding... which would be affirmation of the gays’ “need to be accepted as having a normal union”.
And to your excellent point that human bonding (copulation and procreation) has existed for 2.5 million years. If we set aside creationism - homosexual bonding would have resulted in 2 generations of homo sapiens - then *pfft*^&^%&$. Bye bye brutus!!!
Not a poll, but an *aggregator*. Polls are the raw data, aggregators create the real picture.
But hey, enjoy your unskewing. .
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.