Posts

Showing posts with the label Respect for Marriage

Biden and Gay Marriage

Image
President Joe Biden has signed the so-called Respect for Marriage Act into law, spurning warnings the act will impede religious freedom, and surrounded by LGBTQ activists, lawmakers, and drag queens. “Today is a good day,” Biden said Tuesday as he signed the legislation. “A day America takes a vital step toward equality, for liberty and justice, not just for some, but for everyone. Toward creating a nation where decency, dignity, and love are recognized, honored, and protected.” “We’re here today to celebrate their courage and everyone who made the day possible,” the president added. “Courage that led to progress we’ve seen over the decades, progress that gives us hope that every generation will continue on our journey toward a more perfect union.” The move was strongly condemned by religious leaders like Catholic Vote President Brian Burch. “Laws passed during lame-duck sessions are by definition desperate,” Burch said Tuesday. “This gross attempt to redefine marriage allows radical a

There is No Justification for a Conservative Senator to Sign the ‘Respect for Marriage Act’

Image
Why would 12 Republican senators vote in favor of a bill which “provides statutory authority for same-sex and interracial marriages”? How could almost 25% of all Republican senators agree to back this? The issue, of course, is not their backing of interracial marriages. No major leader with any credibility or respected platform is saying such marriages should not be recognized by law. In fact, it is misleading even to put interracial marriages, which contain the fundamental building blocks of marriage and family, namely a man and a woman, in the same category as same-sex “marriages,” which by definition omit either the man or the woman. Rejection of interracial marriages is a matter of bigotry, not biology. The issue is these Republican leaders offering their names in support of these same-sex unions. What could possibly motivate them? Accepting Obergefell and Thinking This Bill Protects Religious Liberties  In the words of Sen. Mitt Romney, one of the aforementioned 12 and himself a d

The ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ Sets the Stage to Overturn Obergefell v. Hodges

Image
While I am disappointed that the “Respect for Marriage Act” (RFMA) passed in the U.S. Congress, I am convinced that this bill will be the undoing of the Supreme Court’s 2015 same-sex marriage opinion in Obergefell v. Hodges. We fought hard to stop HR 8404, and we came very close to killing the bill thanks to so many citizens engaged in preserving religious freedom in America. To them, I would say, “Don’t get discouraged.” Now we move to the next strategy, in which I have a high level of confidence. The advocates of RFMA may celebrate today, but that celebration will not last. Lawmakers and LGBTQ advocates have unwittingly created the perfect scenario to fix the mess the High Court originally created. Obergefell, like Roe v. Wade, has no constitutional foundation. Overturning Obergefell would return the regulation and definition of marriage to the States as it was throughout our history up till the Court issued its flawed opinion in June 2015. Like abortion, many states would return to

Gay Marriage state by state review

Image
Before the Court’s official decision to overturn Roe v. Wade was released, President Biden was already warning that same-sex “marriage” would be next. As he said in May, “It’s not just the brutality of taking away a woman’s right to her body … but it also if you read the opinion … basically says there’s no such thing as the right to privacy. If that holds … mark my words: They are going to go after the Supreme Court decision on same-sex marriage.” Was he right? Why Roe is Different On the one hand, Justice Samuel Alito made clear in his opinion for the majority that the overturning of Roe was different than other cases the Court could one day revisit since Roe involved “potential life.” As David French explained, “In plain English, Alito argues that abortion is dramatically different from cases involving marriage because abortion involves harm to a non-consenting party, the “potential life” (to use the language from Roe) of the unborn child. Interracial marriage involves consenting adu