Posted on 06/29/2015 1:11:25 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Coeur d‘Alene, Idaho, city officials have laid down the law to Christian pastors within their community, telling them bluntly via an ordinance that if they refuse to marry homosexuals, they will face jail time and fines.
The dictate comes on the heels of a legal battle with Donald and Evelyn Knapp, ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post wedding chapel in the city, but who oppose gay marriage, The Daily Caller reported.
A federal judge recently ruled that the state’s ban on gay marriage was unconstitutional, while the city of Coeur d‘Alene has an ordinance that prevents discrimination based on sexual preference.
The Supreme Court’s recent refusal to take on gay rights’ appeals from five states has opened the doors for same-sex marriages to go forth.
The Knapps were just asked by a gay couple to perform their wedding ceremony, The Daily Caller reported.
“On Friday, a same-sex couple asked to be married by the Knapps, and the Knapps politely declined,” The Daily Signal reported. “The Knapps now face a 180-day jail term and a $1,000 fine for each day they decline to celebrate the same-sex wedding.”(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
That is an excellent idea. Christian pastors should require Biblical pre-marital counseling anyway before they marry people. It would be across-the-board, and could include covering things like marriage is, and what it isn’t, according to the Bible, and should be the same for all who seek to be married by the pastors in question. This could include going over the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah and the sin which brought God’s judgement upon them.
What if you are a 27 year old Christian, Navy SEAL, hunting terrorists? You don't want your marriage to be legal?
Yep. City had to back off, too. CDA is trending liberal but it isn't there yet.
Since he wasn't a libertarian, Thomas Jefferson disagreed with you.
THOMAS JEFFERSON
Bond for Marriage License [23 December 1771] Know all men by these presents that we Thomas Jefferson and Francis Eppes are held and firmly bound to our sovereign lord the king his heirs and successors in the sum of fifty pounds current money of Virginia, to the paiment of which, well and truly to be made we bind ourselves jointly and severally, our joint and several heirs executors and administrators in witness whereof we have hereto set our hands and seals this twenty third day of December in the year of our lord one thousand seven hundred and seventy one.
The condition of the above obligation is such that if there be no lawful cause to obstruct a marriage intended to be had and solemnized between the abovebound Thomas Jefferson and Martha Skelton of the county of Charles city, Widow,1 for which a license is desired, then this obligation is to be null and void; otherwise to remain in full force.
th: jefferson
francis eppes
So. Who said I agree with him?
I just said that Jefferson disagreed with you calling to make marriage in America purely religious, and his America was long before this non-religious America.
It seems like you are way off base with this sneaky anti-Christian libertarian effort to get Christians out of the public marriage fight.
From THE COLONIAL FAMILY IN AMERICA
“While we think of the early New England settlers as very religious, they actually viewed marriage as a civil contract, not a religious contract. Consequently, marriage was a function of the magistrates more than the clergy.”
From LEGISLATIVE GUIDE TO MARRIAGE LAW Iowa.gov
“They (Puritans founders of Massachusetts) believed that marriage was not a religious ceremony but a civil contract. They required that this covenant must be “agreed” or “executed” (not “performed” or “solemnized”) before a magistrate, and not a minister. They also insisted that if the terms of the marriage covenant were broken, then the union could be ended by divorce. These attitudes became the basis of regional marriage customs throughout New England.”
No the problem is the public marriage is now bastardized and you can’t win it anytime soon. So you can keep trying to fight the same fight and keep losing or change the argument. Get gov’t out of our lives and then religion can do what it wants without gov’t regulating their religion. If not, enjoy having your church used as a wedding chapel for gays, polyamorous, and other various Sodom and Gomorrah type people.
good point..
“Californians have been moving to Idaho in droves bringing some their deviant lifestyles with them.”
People need to realize there are deviants everywhere. And good people.
Thinking that there are only problems in certain areas or certain groups is a thing of the past. Its everywhere and we need to fight like that is the case.
Kennedy like others is a bewildered social scientist. I have a religious conviction that my sweat and earnings are mine from the git-go. However, this conviction has been usurped by other humans in the guise of ‘government’. Of course Kennedy and his ilk do not believe my sweat and earnings are mine because they subsist on the toil and sweat of others.
You are just spewing nonsense, not anything real.
Either a marriage will be legal, or not legal, just as it was last year, and in 1950, and in 1850.
No one is going to convince Americans to vote to end all marriage in America.
No one is saying she marriage.
I believe they would say the same thing as any other ‘conservative’: All’s well/fair, as a Free people, until one tramples upon the Rights of others.
In this case, the bakers, etc. are the ones to be protected by the gaystapo. You know, one of the FEW authorized roles of govt....
This should also show, to those that wish to (finally) see, how ‘gay marriage’ is not a Right.
***
This all might be quite ‘beneficial’; like the addict, it usually takes hitting down until the problem is acknowledged.
Funny looks like never is here already. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3306088/posts
No, American voters are not voting to end marriage in America.
Just ending marriage licensing by some states which is one of the solutions I proposed.
Except American voters are not going to do that.
We still need to know if a marriage is legal, or not legal.
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.