Civics Gay Marriage ruling

Philippians 4:6-7 ESV
Do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Psalm 56:3 ESV
When I am afraid, I put my trust in you.

2 Timothy 1:7 ESV
For God gave us a spirit not of fear but of power and love and self-control.

 

Ganado, you are right to identify the fear factor in the dogged opposition of some folk of faith to marriage equality.

I suspect that much of the angst coming from the conservative end of the religious spectrum (across many faith traditions) concerning the issue of marriage equality, is fear: Fear of losing control of the marketplace of religious ideology and influence, and fear that their own beliefs are being marginalised.

Christianity has enjoyed in much of the world, (and in the USA in particular), a privileged position in the cultural identity of many societies. The issue of marriage equality is just one more instance of that privilege being challenged and eroded away; and the Religious Right are worried to the point of paranoia. Evidence of that is the rush of conservative US State Governors, and legislators, enacting legislation to preserve the religious privilege of clerics and churches to discriminate in accordance with their "sincerely" held religious beliefs. This knee jerk pandering of conservative politicians to their conservative religious constituency, probably has less to do with a commitment to opposite sex marriage only ideals, but of the fear of losing the political and financial support of a constituency that still has a lot of political and financial clout.

A different perspective on the opposition to marriage equality by religious conservatives.....

 

The fear mongering is absolutely unconscionable. Just random posting of fear based hate without reading supreme court ruling. NO one can take away a covenant YOU have with God. If you think a ruling by a man can take away your covenant with God then you have NO faith.

Render unto Cesar those things that are cesar's. Licensing belongs to cesar. The rest of the fear mongering is just insane rhetoric perpetrated onto sheeple who blindly repeat it without thinking.

NEWSFLASH: Your brain is for think not repeating nonsense without being informed

 

Ohio Judge Refuses To Marry Same-Sex Couple


And it starts.

 

He did ask to n opt out of the rotation.

The thing is if you are a public official and part of your job is marrying people this is going to be problematic. But notice the delima is for public officials NOT churches as previously predicted by the hater and fear mongers

You can always tell when someone has lost an argument but how they change topics or shift focus when they are proven inaccurate

 

City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings | Fox News


Can churches be forced to perform gay marriages? | AL.com

 

This is not over by a long shot. There is going to be fight after fight over this because we as a nation did not address this in congress.

 

I don't think most gay people want to force churches to marry them, but gay activists will certainly push for this.

Consider the case of "Sweetcakes by Melissa" in Oregon. For refusing to sell a wedding cake to a lesbian couple they have been driven out of business, fined $135,000 plus legal fees, issued a gag order so they can't talk about it, and a few days ago were told they had less than a week to pay the fines or have a lien put on their house. They are appealing, but may still have to pay the money by Monday - the person who can delay payment pending appeal is the same person who ruled against them and issued the absurd fine. This person is also a gay activist and makes donations to gay causes.

As in the other Oregon cases regarding gay marriage, the judge or determining party is biased. In fact, the Judge who ruled against the Oregon Constitutional Amendment that defined a marriage as between a Man and a Woman (passed with over 2/3 of the vote), was gay and married his partner the following day. Conflict of interest is allowed here where otherwise a judge would be required to recuse him or herself. Get the picture?

Back to Sweetcakes - not only are they facing financial ruin, when a fund raising campaign was started for them on go fund me, gays complained and the campaign was shut down. "We want you to pay, but we don't want you to be able to so we can take all your possessions and leave you homeless" is the message. It's not enough to win with these people, they need to destroy you as well.

 

Absolutely correct. It is vicious, wrong, biased, and criminal. And so far....they are getting away with it.

 

Yes it will all get worked out in court and I donated to that couple to help them with legal fees and called a really good attorney I know in oregano who has volunteered for the legal team.

AND. That is not what this thread is about.
That might be my fault for how I titled it.

I'm really looking at the language and how the Supreme Court has left an opening for something else with regard to gun control but instead you all want to post all the worst examples of our system and not actually do anything. Did you contribute to their funding before it was shut down? Did you try and call them after and still contribute? They have a long expensive fight ahead of them so I am asking you to put your money where your mouth is. Take action while you are complaining. It will take all of us to fight this kind of biased application of the law.

This isn't the 1st time we have Ben faced with infringement of constitutional rights. NRA fights the gun fight daily. I hope you contribute to them as well

 

We dropped the ball as a nation. We should have protected the word marriage and allowed all same sex to fall under civil unions . Instead we let the court redefine the word marriage. Its that simple. The entire act of marriage is under attack now. Not by Gays who love each other but by activists bent on destroying traditional values and the church.

 

serfs, we are entering into an era of the return of the Feudal system only on a Global scale. Lords and serfs.

 

You realize this isnt the 1st time a 'church' has had their rights interfered with? What is amazing to me is that so many people are upset over 'gay rights' but not upset over other interference in right to religious freedom. Smells of hippocracy to me.

Judge rejects diocese move on Herx verdict | Courts | Journal Gazette

Judge rejects diocese move on Herx verdict

Rebecca S. Green The Journal Gazette
The local Roman Catholic diocese heard another “no” Monday afternoon from a federal judge in a sexual discrimination case.

Late Monday, U.S. District Judge Robert Miller denied the Diocese of Fort Wayne-South Bend’s request he set aside a December jury verdict awarding a former Catholic language arts teacher money after finding the diocese had discriminated against her.

The jury awarded Emily Herx $1.9 million, finding that the diocese violated her civil rights when it elected not to renew her contract after she underwent in vitro fertilization.

The diocese contends that it was protected from Herx’s complaints of gender discrimination because it is a religious institution, and when it fired her for undergoing in vitro fertilization, it was because she violated church teaching, not because she tried to get pregnant.

In vitro fertilization is prohibited by the Roman Catholic Church as an intrinsic evil that no circumstances can justify.

The jury sided with Herx and awarded her $1.9 million, although a judge later reduced that to its current amount of more than $540,000.

Diocesan attorneys filed a motion in January, asking Miller, again as they had during the course of the trial and before the appellate court as the case progressed, to rule in their favor.

They argued Herx not only failed to present sufficient evidence to prove gender discrimination, but also that the decision not to renew her contract was made on religious grounds and not for a jury to decide.

“It was for the Church to decide whether Herx’s contract should be non-renewed for failing to comply with Church teachings, not a court or jury,” diocesan attorneys argued.

But in his order on Monday, Miller wrote the evidence presented could support a verdict for either side, but that the jury in this case looked at the evidence and drew “permissible inferences” that a male teacher would have been treated differently from Herx.

“The evidence supports the verdict,” he wrote. “The same evidence supports an inference that (Herx) wouldn’t have been discharged had she not been