Tuesday, March 10, 2015

Supreme Court "Out Of Touch" On Redefining Marriage? Or Merely Asleep?

Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

The Supreme Court will hear the arguments over same-sex "marriage" on April 28 and will make audio of the proceedings available later that day.

This is the only time this term the Court will do a "quick release" of audio recording of the proceedings.

Obviously they recognize the level of public interest in the movement to redefine marriage and family.

But do they recognize the strong and growing push back in the country toward redefining the most basic human component---marriage?

Apparently Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg does not.

In an interview with Bloomberg News on February 12 she was asked if she thought that there are parts of the country that would not accept" a Supreme Court decision declaring "a constitutional right for same sex couples to marry?"

She said, "I think it's doubtful that it wouldn't be accepted. The change in people's attitudes on that issue has been enormous."

Perhaps the Justice has been sleeping again, as she did during President Obama's recent State of the Union Address. (She later explained she had drunk too much wine before the speech).

We have been forcefully told by the secular left progressives that America has changed its attitudes regarding marriage, however, in light of current and ongoing assaults on freedom of religious expression and the right of conscience, Americans are taking a closer look---and apparently changing their minds.

In fact, Ginsberg seems to be out of touch with the issue itself. When asked about the possibility of redefining marriage she said, "It's not about same-sex unions as marriage."

She said, "In recent years, people have said 'This is the way I am'. And others have looked around and we discovered, it's our next door neighbor---we're very fond of them. Or it's our child's best friend---or even our child. And the rest of us recognized that they are one of us."

There is a growing national sense that to oppose redefining marriage and family does not equate to "hate" toward those who engage in that particular sexual behavior. The accusations of the activists are becoming hollow, because it is they themselves, the champions of "tolerance", who are practicing "hate."

That deception worked for the activists for a while. It isn't working now.

Every one knows someone who practices homosexuality---in their family, their community, etc.

People of biblical beliefs regarding the matter do not hate the people who engage in homosexual behavior.

In fact, the vicious reactions against Christians by homosexuals is, interestingly enough, serving as a wake up call to the real consequences or redefining marriage and family.

And the godly response by those whose lives and businesses are crushed by the homosexual activists and a zealot government intent on advancing their secular ideology, is testimony to love---not hate, on the part of these Christians.

Good and decent people will not sit by and take notice of the growing list of small businesses and their Christian owners being dragged through court and ultimately bankrupted and destroyed because they respectfully decline to participate in a so-called gay "wedding."

Family Research Council has recently commissioned a survey that changes the wording in the survey from whether "gays and lesbians" have the "right" to marry to a more fundamental question of, "What is marriage?" The results are very different than what we are being told by the activists and a complicit press.

When correctly framed as an issue about the definition of marriage, FRC found that a majority of Americans---53 to 43 percent margin---still say, "I believe marriage should be defined only as a union between a man and a woman."

Is Justice Ginsberg sleeping again, or merely lost in the deception of it all?

FRC found that even among those who support abolishing the one-man, one-woman definition of marriage, more than a quarter in the poll recognize that such social change, if it is to happen, should only happen through the democratic process. It should not be imposed by the Supreme Court fabricating a "Right" found nowhere in the Constitution or in the Court's precedents---not even in the 2013 striking down of part of the Federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

The even more astonishing revelation of the FRC Poll is that by an 81-12 percent margin people believe that government should leave people free to follow their beliefs about marriage as they live their daily lives and in the way they run their businesses.

Unfortunately, the opportunity for Washington state to speak properly to this issue was lost through infighting among those obsessed with personally leading the opposition to redefining marriage. Thankfully that is not the case in most states.

The list of those being destroyed due to their biblical beliefs regarding marriage is long and growing. From a florist (Barronell Stutzman) in Richland, to the Atlanta Fire Chief (Kelvin Cochran) to bakers, photographers and owners of wedding venues, homosexuals, rather than to chose another provider have opted to destroy the small business person because they believe something different than the homosexual believes about marriage.

With the full, crushing force of the state now being brought to bear on these citizens because of their biblical beliefs, people are awakening to the fact that redefining marriage and family does in fact have consequences.

And freedom of religious expression is the first noticeable causality.

Other causalities will follow.

It's not likely that Justice Ginsberg will "awaken" any time soon, but hopefully others on the High Court will.

Be Vigilant. Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Prayerful. Be Free


  1. "Well, I must have been born that way." seems to be the popular lie these days. Or, maybe it was my upbringing, or culture I was exposed to, but still, "I must have been born that way."

    Yes this world will prey on whatever it might consider to be weak or frail, and it may probe and intrude itself upon another human being, wanting to treat it like a personal guinea pig, or tease, or abuse, or do whatever it wants to for whatever carnal reason it has, and yes I suppose some people have become victims of a fallen environment, but do they have to be taken into the lie that says they must have been born that way?

    What ever happened to faith? Hebrews 11 is all about faith and examples of it. Then there's something interesting in chapter 12, about God being called the Father of spirits. ( see Heb 12:9 KVJ)

    So what's wrong with somebody instead of saying, "I must have been born this way.", saying, " Well, maybe I haven't been living unto God the way I should have in the past...Maybe this fallen world got a foothold in my life because I went too much on my own way in life, or Maybe life is more spiritual than I first realized, and now I'm beginning to see that it's not at all uncommon for people to have some spiritual battles, or Maybe it's as if Satan is found a way to access my life, and now I find myself in a testing and trial situation, and I don't know if this is going to last ten days, ten months, or ten years, or however long, but what's wrong with living by faith in God, and looking to him to do his work of restoration, healing, and change, whether it takes an hour, a week, or a decade? Isn't this what faith is about?"

    There's got to be something better than "Well, I must have been born this way."

    1. Weren't you born straight?

  2. The latest Wall Street Journal/NBC poll shows that 59% of Americans support allowing same-sex marriage. But that should be immaterial to the supreme court, they should consider constitutionality only, not public opinion. However, either way, same sex marriage wins.

    1. As the gay agenda is by it's nature an enemy of constitutional life in America, the courts has a responsibility to stop it's abuses and intrusions into the lives of others whether they be state workers who would be required by law to provide a "marriage" license to homosexuals who would like to be "legally" "married, or the intrusions they seek into all other streams of life in America.

      The federal government has a right to stop abuses that affect others in damaging ways. The moral fabric is very much a part of the nation. Marriage has already been defined by God and man as between one man and one woman. That has been the norm, and it has been the most beneficial of institutions. It's been proven to work and work it's good work toward all men fairly and justly without intrusion.

      No matter what, God's definition wins and same sex "marriage" looses.

    2. hmm... not sure what 'looses' means. It's not really a word, you know.

  3. Kent. One chooses to live the godly life or one chooses to live the worldly. One is self-centered and one is selfless. The more compromises we make the more we become self-centered. It is all about choice: Ps. 1. The choices have shifted and we are living with the consequences. As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. Come what may..


Faith & Freedom welcomes your comment posts. Remember, keep it short, keep it on message and relevant, and identify your town.