Three Reasons It Isn’t Over

The Supreme Court has spoken.

It wasn’t a surprise, but it was disappointing. In a 5-4 decision, the Court created an oven-fresh, new right to marry someone of the same gender.  The Court provided no limiting principle that would prevent their logic from extending to other kinds of relationships whose profession of love is not currently acknowledged with a marriage license.

The decision was a setback for the rule of law.

The Constitution says as much about marriage as it does about the Seahawks.  When the Constitution is silent on an issue, then that issue should be resolved by the legislative branch of government.  The states (or Congress) should have been allowed to continue wrestling with this issue and reaching a resolution based on the input of the people through their elected representatives.

But as it turns out, the voices of 51 million people from thirty-one states who voted for laws defining marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman were overruled by five, unelected lawyers in Washington, DC.

For a number of people, the response to the Court’s decision was relief.  Sentiments like, “At least it’s over!!” and “Can we please stop talking about gay marriage now?”

Unfortunately, the conflict between the sexual revolution and the nation’s faith-based people and institutions may only intensify in the coming months and years.  Here’s why.

1. The LGBT political leadership doesn’t want to coexist:  An entire industry was built to accomplish what happened on Friday.  That industry is not going to suddenly declare itself obsolete. You don’t raise money by declaring victory. Now that “full equality under the law” has been accomplished, there will be another crisis requiring their attention, and another, and another…

2. Some people are still free to disagree: The goal of the LGBT political movement has always been to eradicate the belief that homosexuality and heterosexuality are different.  That is why they promote policies that allow someone to decline to decorate a cake critical of same-sex “marriage,” but not decline to decorate a cake supportive of it.  The goal is to create a government that punishes beliefs about homosexuality they disagree with. Therefore, as long as you have the freedom to run your business, non-profit, university, school, or church according to your beliefs, their job is not done.

3. Now it’s easier to call you a racist, legally speaking:  The 14th Amendment was written to stop the government from treating people differently because of their race. Now that the Supreme Court has discovered a new right to marry someone of the same gender in the 14th amendment, it’s easier to argue that those who don’t celebrate homosexuality are the same as racists. As a result, the ability to remove tax-exempt status, cut off federal funding to religious universities, and otherwise marginalize people who believe in natural marriage became easier.

Marriage has been redefined most recently, but it may not be the last word to be redefined.

Soon, “religious freedom” may mean only the freedom to believe what you want in your head and maybe talk about it at church or at home. You may need a license though. In the same way, “civil rights” may soon be redefined so that a person can be forced to celebrate an event they disagree with but not free to say something “offensive”.  After all, that’s “hate speech.”

The world is changing quickly, but the truth about marriage remains.

And the need for courage only grows.

So you stayed out of the debate about marriage because you didn’t feel like telling someone else how to live their life.  Great.

But what will you do when they start telling you how to live yours?

Will you surrender all your freedom in an effort to avoid being misunderstood? Let’s hope not.

But we’re going to find out, because, despite what we all wish, this is far from over.

11 replies
  1. Sharon
    Sharon says:

    Dear Supreme Court Justices,

    Some liberties go too far for our own good, right? You agree in some instances, I’m sure.
    As an orphan early in life, I’m especially qualified to assert that the link between two biological parents and their child is the strongest bond in society. Mess with that by sanctioning same sex marriage and you intentionally biologically divorce children from nature’s strongest bond: the bond of a biological mother and father. A child will no doubt struggle harder in life as a result.
    Aren’t you ignoring the obvious by making same sex marriage a constitutional right: It is heterosexual behavior that gives us children. And committed heterosexual partners, as biological parents, provide the strongest foundation for raising children. Any ivy-league school’s research will verify this. Where have you been in light of this data? Can you think of a stronger bond in nature than that of biological parent and child? If you can, please tell me what that is.
    Love (even between two or more consenting adults) doesn’t mean that anything goes. Love does direct our attitude and response to those we don’t entirely agree with. Are adult same sex unions and bisexual unions as precious a thing as two biological parents raising their child? Aren’t we really talking about elevating adult sexual preferences over the rights of children to be raised by both biological parents? If so, where do children fall in the mix? Make no mistake that being sexually active is an elective behavior, unlike race and being born with a female or male body. In any case, celibacy is always an option!

    Also, didn’t you have the slightest hint that your recent ruling is a weapon against true respect and freedom of speech and religion in the marketplace? Of course you did. Our primary freedoms are critically at stake, and you’ve ignored the logical consequences resounding throughout America as many good people lose their livelihood over your ruling. Firings, fines and gagging free speech are the rule of the land now.
    Hopefully in the future, our law makers will proceed with more caution before they play God with our long-held religious underpinnings…the same ones that gave us: We are all loved by God and we’re to respect each other even when we disagree. I’m trying to do that here, but it’s hard when the affect of your ruling is: that what goes on in consenting adults’ bedrooms is now our most sacred tenant of the land. Really? That’s a perfect example of a liberty going too far.
    You’ve forgotten that respect keeps the debate open over the fuzzier issues in our culture. If you find hate-mongers among Christians, it is because they aren’t living up to the two greatest commandments and they need to be reminded of the second one: giving respect to our neighbor, as we respect ourselves. My hope is that you’d let the best, most logical, idea rise to the top. Are our memories so short as to forget the default setting of most of history: government infringement upon basic freedoms of speech and religion! Well, we’ve arrived there once again, thanks to you!
    And again, without even resorting to a religious or historical argument, why didn’t you let nature’s strongest natural bond be your guide?
    God help us all who are living with fewer rights, not more now that you’ve obviously deemed a deep and widely held moral belief as a crime. God tells us to do and not do certain things for our betterment and we believe God is Good with a capital G…and since we aren’t…always, then maybe we should listen.
    Is it too late to ask you to beware of using inclusiveness as a weapon against true respect and freedom of speech and religion in the marketplace? And to protect our most vulnerable in society (children) over the recreational sex of same sex couples? Are you too blind to at least strive to keep children linked to both biological parents whenever possible? Your sure aren’t doing that now!
    Your legacy will live in infamy, as your ruling stands. The justices who voted to make same sex unions a constitutional right are hurting children first. And you’re actually celebrating that you’ve managed to overturn our honored, if not sacred, 1st Amendment rights from nearly 250 years of U.S. history?
    Examine your souls for why you’re really doing this, especially since you’ve adeptly managed to avoid the most critical part of the equation: Children’s rights and freedom of speech and religion in America.
    All are under attack and you’re responsible for that. But…maybe it’s not too late for you to fix what you’ve broken. Somebody has to…for REAL liberty…and justice. I wish I didn’t have to write this but outrage is warranted.

    Reply
  2. remember alamo
    remember alamo says:

    When the door was opened to open homosexuality in the military, “homosexual marriage” government controlled medical it will not be easy to shut. When the ones in “power” go down the path of corruption they will not easily be turned back.

    Reply
  3. Saint John the Baptist
    Saint John the Baptist says:

    BobVB: Your post proves lots of ignorance, zero insight. Keep your head in the sand much? ‘Fantasies of persecution’? You honestly believe that the homosexual lobbies are not salivating at the just minted legal ability to demean/control/silence Christians? Read some of their posts to catch a clue. More importantly, what will YOU do in support of Christians when the persecution DOES materialize? I’m sure we will hear crickets chirping from your quarter…..

    Reply
    • BobVB
      BobVB says:

      I am a Christian, if and when there is any persecution of Christians I’ll be in the center of it.

      Again when any ‘persecution’ happens anywhere other than in your head get back to me.

      Reply
      • remember alamo
        remember alamo says:

        It is not just in our head it is already happening. The flower lady in Washington is being persecuted for her beliefs.

        Reply
        • BobVB
          BobVB says:

          The business owner broke the law and was fined. She is now running the business legally by not offering wedding services to anyone.

          There is no right to religious discrimination against a customer responding to a public offer.

          Reply
  4. BobVB
    BobVB says:

    Some insight, lots of paranoia. Previous writer talks about people more motivated by feelings, well this not is geared for just such people.

    I don’t know of anyone against men and women marrying, ‘natural marriage’ needs no protection.

    What will you all do when the fantasies of persecution don’t materialize?

    Reply
  5. Carmen
    Carmen says:

    Today there are more feelers than thinkers, more comfortably uninformed than driven-to-be informed, more short-sighted than reflective in their thought processes, and far fewer seeking to know God. For the masses,whatever tickles their ears is what they decide to believe, making themselves perfect pawns for the media’s nonstop propaganda. I am continually stunned that such a substantial number of “Christians” lack the godly character to aspire to righteousness over political correctness, being unwilling to take the step to be transformed to God’s likeness. When people refuse to submit to God’s authority or stand for the advancement of His Kingdom, it strikes me that they are not in a truly right and trusting relationship with the Lord. Too many are silent on the waywardness of the LGBT agenda because they are lazy and would rather ignore the issues (and the consequences), are captive to the gay message of “It’s all about LOVE” (even though true love includes respect for the rights of others), or so weak in their faith and commitment to Christ that they use their self-generated fear as an excuse to hide away. I do believe there is some confusion that sometimes can come from the pulpit when the message is that “loving on” (as opposed to “loving”) our enemies trumps taking action against evil out of concern that we might hurt their feelings. To look at Jesus as an example, what seems clear to me is that while honoring the individual, he did confront sin and gave his listeners an opportunity to consider what he said so they could repent and be forgiven. If those who heard his words were unwilling to change and to turn away from what held them in spiritual bondage, he didn’t continue to plead his case but walked away and moved on to offer hope to those who would hear his voice. He knew His time on earth was limited, and He had to be fruitful. The way I see it now is that as a believer, I should remain true to God and His purposes which means not being a part of deceiving others that whatever they are doing is OK. I’m realizing more and more that I need to meditate on God’s Word if I want my thoughts and actions to be in line with God’s, not my own. One thing I am going to do is be more of an activist in writing to judges. While it shouldn’t have been so, it seems that the justices on the Supreme Court who validated same-sex marriage were wooed by personal stories coming from the Left about how victimized gays are. While I won’t approach the justices solely from the standpoint of trying to win their empathy, I will also remind them of their promised commitment to law and to respect our rights to live out our faith. Finally, I will ask and warn them to consider the consequences that come from yielding to popular opinion. History is very telling about the dangers of this.

    Reply
  6. Barbara Thomson
    Barbara Thomson says:

    It feels like the civil war all over again only a different subject. We still know who is in control and who defines marriage!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Want to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.