C3

Did a Nevada Federal Judge Let Personal Beliefs Affect His Marriage Ruling?

Why did the federal district judge who'd upheld Nevada's marriage ban remove himself from the case when the 9th Circuit ordered him to implement its pro-equality decision?
PFAW Foundation

Klingenschmitt: Government Recognition Of Gay Marriage Is Deceiving Citizens Into Hell

On yesterday's "Pray In Jesus Name" program, Gordon Klingenschmitt warned that recent court decisions striking down various gay marriage bans and the Supreme Court's decision not to hear the appeals of such rulings are God's judgment on America and that legalizing gay marriage is sending Americans to Hell.

"Gay marriage is still illegal in all fifty states because God has decreed it so," Klingenschmitt declared before praying that "our laws will reflect God's highest law so that our government locally does not deceive our citizens into Hell by telling the citizens this is okay, this is normal, this is acceptable when God, you yourself, have decreed it to be sin":

Fischer: 'The Mark Of The Beast Today Is The Rainbow Flag'

On his radio program yesterday, Bryan Fischer ran through a list of supposed tales of anti-Christian persecution in which individuals and businesses have been disciplined or sanctioned for voicing anti-gay views or refusing to serve gay customers and cited them all as proof that "the Mark of the Beast today is the rainbow flag."

Fischer was particularly upset that a t-shirt company in Kentucky had recently been found to have discriminated against the Gay and Lesbian Services Organization of Lexington by refusing to print up shirts for the group back in 2012.

Businesses like this are now "not allowed to engage in commerce because they would not take the Mark of the Beast on their hands or on their foreheads," Fischer said. "They would not allow the Beast to dictate to them what they did with regard to the homosexual agenda, what they did or what they thought."

Saying that the owners of this company are literally being turned into slaves by not being allowed to discriminate against gay customers, Fischer declared that they have now been forced to "take the Mark of the Beast on their hand, they've got to make the t-shirts that they gay lobby says you have got to make, and they have to take the Mark of the Beast on their foreheads, even the way they think has to be realigned with what is politically correct":

NOM Hails Huckabee, Echoes His Threat To Abandon The GOP Over Gay Marriage

Earlier this week, Mike Huckabee ripped into the Republican Party for what he feels is its insufficient willingness to take a public stand against gay marriage, declaring that he is "utterly exasperated" with the GOP and its leadership on the issue. He threatened to leave the party and take a bunch of "God-fearing, Bible-believing people" with him unless the party speaks out more forcefully against gay rights.

Predictably, the National Organization for Marriage hailed Huckabee as a hero today, praising him for "speaking for millions of Americans who are sick of Republican elitists remaining silent and refusing to fight for the survival of marriage." The anti-gay organization echoed Huckabee's complaints and similarly warned that "millions of conservatives will abandon [the GOP] and join with officials who will fight" if the party does not take a stand on this issue:

The National Organization for Marriage (NOM) today praised Governor Mike Huckabee for his comments calling out Republicans for failing to stand strong for marriage in the face of the unconscionable decision of the US Supreme Court to allow lower court decisions redefining marriage to take effect without so much as even considering their merits. Huckabee told an interviewer that if Republicans abdicate on marriage and abortion he would leave the party and become an Independent. "I'll start finding people that have guts to stand," he pledged.

"Governor Huckabee is exactly right and is speaking for millions of Americans who are sick of Republican elitists remaining silent and refusing to fight for the survival of marriage, the principal building block of society and the foundation of civilization," said Brian S. Brown, president of NOM. "Republicans who remain silent on marriage do so at their own peril and risk losing elections across the country. If conservatives see Republican candidates fail to lead on marriage — or worse, come out in favor of redefining marriage — then conservatives will abandon those candidates."

Brown said that some Republican leaders were actively supporting candidates who are not only in favor of same-sex 'marriage,' but also support abortion. House Speaker John Boehner and the National Republican Campaign Committee are actively supporting Carl DeMaio (CA-52) and Richard Tisei (MA-6), both of whom are campaigning in favor of gay 'marriage' and support abortion.

"NOM has joined with other groups to actively campaign against Carl DeMaio and Richard Tisei, along with Oregon Republican US Senate candidate Monica Wehby, because they are antithetical to the Republican platform and GOP principles," said Brown. "We refuse to follow the leaders in Washington as if we were sheep expected to dutifully support candidates whose positions are an insult to conservatives and will severely damage the nation. We are going to do our best to defeat these candidates because they are wholly unworthy of holding high office."

Brown noted that some prominent Republicans such as Sen. Ted Cruz, Sen. Mike Lee, Rep. Tim Huelskamp and others had condemned the US Supreme Court's decision to allow the redefinition of marriage to proceed apace in five states.

"We are grateful for those leaders who have spoken out to condemn the Supreme Court for their unprincipled and outrageous decision to allow the redefinition of marriage to occur in these states," Brown said. "We are prepared to work tirelessly to support them and others who lead in the fight to preserve marriage. But Governor Huckabee is right. If more Republican leaders do not speak up and join the fight, then millions of conservatives will abandon them and join with officials who will fight. Marriage is on the line in our country, and it's time for people to get off the bench and into the battle."

Gordon Klingenschmitt's Embarrassing Campaign Rolls On

Ever since he won the Republican primary and became the official GOP nominee for an open seat in the Colorado state legislature, Gordon Klingenschmitt has proven himself to be a complete embarrassment to his party as party officials and fellow Republicans have repeatedly denounced him.

The state GOP has quickly learned that having a radical Religious Right activist and anti-gay exorcist as its candidate is creating nothing but headaches since Klingenschmitt seems to have no idea what he is doing, as he demonstrated once again when he recently told local residents who asked to meet with him to discuss his rabidly anti-gay views that he would not do so until after the election and even then, he'd only be willing to meet after screening them because he fears for this safety:

Gordon Klingenschmitt, a Colorado Springs state House candidate who has gotten attention from making controversial statements, told three members of the Colorado Springs lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community he would only meet with them after the election and only if his "security staff" screened the attendees first to determine whether it would be a "safe meeting."

"Sadly, I've received threats from people who hate religious freedom, and I wonder if the following video is representative of the behavior of some people with whom you are inviting me to meet?" Klingenschmitt wrote in an email.

The video attached is of Anita Bryant - the singer who vocally opposed LGBT rights in the '70s - getting a pie thrown in her face during a live television interview nearly four decades ago.

...

Steve Durham, a Republican activist and lobbyist, said the El Paso County Republican Executive Director Daniel Cole was included in the exchange and sent a response to Klingenschmitt rebuking him.

"The response from the party was that Mr. Klingenschmitt's email was inappropriate and uncalled for and that he should chose his words more carefully," Durham said. "There was a note of pretty strong disapproval."

Yet despite his radical record, it looks like the state Republican party can expect to have him around for the foreseeable future.

As Klingenschmitt barrels along with a huge fundraising advantage, he is insisting that his opponent is the real extremist:

As of Sept. 29, Klingenschmitt has spent more than $42,079, compared with Fornander's $827, according to the secretary of state.

Secretary of state voter registration statistics as of Oct. 1 
show 18,296 registered Republicans, 7,791 registered Democrats and 14,061 unaffiliated voters in the district.

Klingenschmitt, an Air Force Academy graduate, believes his views represent the district, which includes eastern Colorado Springs and Peterson Air Force Base.

He believes local control in education, lower taxes and less regulation for businesses and a protection of constitutional rights are the biggest issues in the upcoming 
election.

"My opponent is far more extreme on the left than I am in the center right," Klingenschmitt said.

Texas Judge Could Teach the Roberts Court a Thing or Two

A Texas federal judge strikes down that state's restrictive voter ID law as intentionally discriminatory.
PFAW Foundation

Still More Evidence That David Barton's History Simply Cannot Be Trusted

Several times, we have heard David Barton make the absurd claim that biblical law was directly incorporated into the U.S. Constitution through the Seventh Amendment, which he then uses to assert that laws legalizing abortion and gay marriage are unconstitutional.

Lately, Barton has tried to bolster this argument by citing an obscure 1913 Texas Supreme Court ruling in a case called Grigsby v Reib, which he claims proves that America can never accept a definition of marriage that differs from God's definition.

In Barton's telling, this case was about efforts to attain legal recognition for secular "civil unions" that were separate from marriage as a religious institution but which the court denied on the grounds that "government is not allowed to redefine something that God himself has defined."

On his radio show yesterday, Barton once again cited the case and read excerpts from the decision to argue that gay marriage can never be legal: 

Marriage was not originated by human law. When God created Eve, she was a wife to Adam; they then and there occupied the status of husband to wife and wife to husband ... The truth is that civil government has grown out of marriage. which created homes, and population, and society, from which government became necessary. Marriages will produce a home and family that will contribute to good society, to free and just government, and to the support of Christianity. It would be sacrilegious to apply the designation "a civil contract" to such a marriage. It is that and more; a status ordained by God.

The key finding in this case, Barton asserts, is that the court basically ruled that "we can't do something different than what God's done on" the issue of marriage.

Given that nothing that Barton says ought ever to be taken at face value, we decided to read the court decision for ourselves and, not surprisingly, found that Barton's interpretation of the ruling is entirely misleading.

The case involved a woman named Jessie Stallcup, who claimed to have been the wife of a widower named G.M.D. Grigsby and who had sued Grigsby's sister for control of his estate following his death. Stallcup was a prostitute whom Grigsby used to visit and she claimed that the two had agreed to become husband and wife, though they never held a ceremony, nor did they cohabitate or take any other actions to signal that they were now living has husband and wife.

The case heard by the Texas Supreme Court revolved around Stallcup's contention that she lost her lawsuit because the trial court ignored a binding appellate court precedent that stated that a common law marriage "requires only the agreement of the man and woman to become then and thenceforth husband and wife. When this takes place, the marriage is complete."

The Texas Supreme Court disagreed with Stallcup's contention, pointing out that the ruling in question involved a couple that had lived and presented themselves as husband and wife following their agreement, with the Texas Supreme Court stating that it takes more than a simple verbal agreement to constitute a legitimate marriage.

To demonstrate this point, the Texas Supreme Court proposed a hypothetical situation in which a man and a women met for the first time, agreed to become man and wife, and then went their separate ways, never to see one another again. This obviously would not constitute a binding marriage, the court found, and neither did the relationship between Stallcup and Grigsby on the grounds that, beyond their apparent agreement, they never took any further steps to establish themselves as husband and wife.

"It would be sacrilegious" to give legal standing to such relationships, the court found, because it would then give complete strangers the right to contest seemingly every inheritance by simply claiming to have been the secret spouse of the deceased.

Contrary to Barton's claims that this case enshrines divine principles about marriage into our civil laws, the court repeatedly notes that marriage is a nothing more than a civil contract that requires "neither license nor solemnization of religious or official ceremony" to be legally binding.

​Barton claims that this case was about trying to create a secular alternative to marriage, which the court slapped down because there can never be any legal marriage that does not correspond to "God's definition." In reality, the case addressed the issue of whether a supposedly secret verbal agreement to become husband and wife constitutes a legally binding and recognizable common law marriage and whether the relationship between Stallcup and Grigsby qualified as one under the law, with the court ruling that it did not because it didn't meet the most basic requirements.

This is just one more example of Barton's willingness to intentionally and flagrantly misrepresent history in order to promote his religious and political agenda.

Glenn Beck's Sanity Box: How Our Society Will Go From Gender-Inclusive Classrooms To Mass Genocide

Yesterday, The National Review reported on a document produced by a group called Gender Spectrum providing teachers with suggestions on how to create gender inclusive classrooms. Among the suggestions was that rather than separating the boys into one line and the girl into another, teachers could come up with gender-neutral ways of breaking up the class, such as separating by birthdays.

Another suggestion was for teachers to avoid using phrases like "boys and girls" and instead have the students come up with a class nickname and then use that nickname for calling the class together. The example the document provided was "purple penguins," so that the teacher could then, for example, call out for all the purple penguins to meet on the rug for reading time.

Predictably, Glenn Beck pretty much lost his mind on his radio show today over this, saying that he is going to start printing out these sorts of stories and sealing them up in a box that he can bury in the side of a mountain so that future generations can see just how deranged our society has become.

"Five thousand years from now," Beck ranted, "they will dig on the side of a mountain and they will find a big thing marked 'Glenn Beck's Sanity Box - what drove him insane is all in this box; open at your own peril.'"

Upon reading these stories, future generations will ask "what the hell were they thinking" and then they will find a message, Beck said, "probably scrawled in my own urine and poop" informing them that at least some of those living today realized the world had gone utterly insane, but nobody would listen to them.

Naturally, Beck then explained that all of this is rooted in a failure to acknowledge the existence of God, warning that when there is no Creator and society can decide its own rules, "this is what leads to mass genocide, every time!"

Barber: SCOTUS Is 'Tempting The Wrath Of God' With Gay Marriage Decision

Matt Barber and Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel continue to fume about the Supreme Court's recent decision to allow several lower-court marriage equality rulings to stand and have dedicated several recent episodes of their "Faith and Freedom" radio program to ranting about it, with Barber at one point warning that America will soon face divine wrath.

On an episode set to run on Tuesday, Barber warns that "homosexual conduct is demonstrably and explicitly, throughout the Old and New Testament, called sin. And when you have a sin-centered redefinition of marriage and the government puts its official stamp on sin, you have the government blessing sin, well, sin cannot be blessed, it cannot be sanctified."

By trying to do so, Barber said, America is "tempting the wrath of God":

Marriage Bans Overturned in Idaho and Nevada

Yesterday, a three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously in favor of equality, striking down same-sex marriage bans in Idaho and Nevada.

Judge Stephen Reinhardt delivered the ruling for the panel, which applied heightened scrutiny because the bans are applied on the basis of sexual orientation, and concluded that the state laws violate the equal protection rights of lesbians and gays who wish to marry. The court took note of the particular harm marriage bans impose on families:

“To allow same-sex couples to adopt children and then to label their families as second-class because the adoptive parents are of the same sex is cruel as well as unconstitutional. Classifying some families, and especially their children, as of lesser value should be repugnant to all those in this nation who profess to believe in ‘family values.’”  

The ruling follows the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the appeals of five states seeking to reverse similar cases in which a lower court ruled state marriage bans unconstitutional. This morning, however, Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy temporarily blocked the appeals court ruling and asked for a response from the plaintiffs involved in Idaho’s marriage lawsuit by Thursday at 5 pm. 

PFAW Foundation

Paul Cameron Says Parents Should Be Exempt From Taxes And Should Get Extra Votes

Paul Cameron was the guest again today on Gordon Klingenschmitt's "Pray In Jesus Name" program where the two set aside their concerns about "a gay" using molestation to recruit kids into homosexuality and focused their discussion instead on the dangers of the birth control pill and declining population growth.

Cameron believes that this "demographic crunch" is the most important problem facing humanity today and so he has come up with a couple of clever solutions:

  1. People with children should be exempt from paying taxes.
  2. People with children should get extra votes.

As Cameron sees it, parents ought not to have to pay any taxes while they are raising their children because they're "assuring the future" and Klingenschmitt thought this was a pretty good idea because it "creates a tax incentive for people to have children and to stay home, maybe, and raise them."

On top of that, Cameron also advocated for giving parents "their vote as a citizen plus one for for each child that they have."

"That means a couple with, say, three children," Cameron explained, "will have eight votes ... Let's change the politics of it so the politicians will suddenly say 'I wanna be family-friendly because I want to come back to Washington'":

Fischer: 'It Looks Like President Obama Wants Ebola To Come To The United States To Punish America For Being Racist'

On yesterday's radio program, Bryan Fischer bizarrely tried to claim that he is not saying that President Obama wants Ebola to come to America as punishment for the nation's history of racism, but rather is simply saying that it sure looks like President Obama wants Ebola to come to America as punishment for the nation's history of racism.

As Fischer sees it, Obama is not doing nearly enough to protect America from the disease and his lackluster effort is  certainly giving the impression that he is intentionally doing very little because he "wants Ebola to come to the United States to punish America for being racist."

Insisting that he is not saying that this is what Obama is doing, but rather that it looks like this is what Obama is doing, Fischer said that "maybe it's part of his redistribution plan to redistribute disease, not just wealth":

Fischer: 'The Gay Gestapo ... Is Basically The Same As Islam'

Bryan Fischer remains furious about the Supreme Court's decision not to hear appeals of lower court rulings striking down gay marriage bans, declaring on his radio program today that gay activism and radical Islam both operate underneath the same "dark, totalitarian" spirit.

"It's convert, submit, or die a political death," Fischer said, linking the push for marriage equality to radical Islam. "Convert, submit, or be banished. I mean that's really what we're dealing with. This is the same kind of totalitarian strain that you see in Islam and this is the gay gestapo pushing this and their message is basically the same as Islam."

Saying that gay activists are intent on persecuting, imprisoning, or destroying anyone who does not agree with their agenda, Fischer said that "if that sounds just like Islam to you, it's because it is. It's exactly the same dark, totalitarian dynamic that you have in Islam":

An 'Utterly Exasperated' Mike Huckabee Threatens To Leave The GOP Over Gay Marriage

This morning's broadcast of the American Family Association's "Today's Issues" program was dedicated to promoting the AFA's "A Time to Speak" documentary, which is aimed at getting pastors to mobilize their congregations to vote in the upcoming elections.

One guest on the program was Mike Huckabee, who began his interview by threatening to leave the Republican Party if the GOP does not take a stand against the Supreme Court's decision yesterday not to hear appeals of lower court rulings striking down gay marriage bans in several states.

Incensed by the decision, Huckabee declared that "I am utterly exasperated with Republicans and the so-called leadership of the Republicans who have abdicated on this issue," warning that by doing so the GOP will "guarantee they're going to lose every election in the future."

"Guarantee it," he said before proclaiming that the Republicans are going to "lose guys like me and a whole bunch of still God-fearing, Bible-believing people" if the party does not stand and fight on the issues of gay marriage and abortion.

"I'm gone," Huckabee warned. "I'll become an independent. I'll start finding people that have guts to stand. I'm tired of this":

Another Nail in the Coffin for Baker v. Nelson

The Supreme Court's decision not to hear marriage equality appeals may have an important substantive effect on the law.
PFAW Foundation

DeLay: 'We Can't Believe' What The Government Is Telling Us About Ebola

Tom DeLay was a guest on Steve Malzberg's Newsmax radio program yesterday where he declared that Americans simply cannot trust President Obama or anyone in the government when it comes to handling the current Ebola crisis.

DeLay asserted that the Obama administration "cannot seem to get beyond their liberal leanings" and take the steps necessary to keep the disease from entering the United States.

"We can't believe everything they're telling us," DeLay said. "I've got so many questions about Ebola and how it's contracted."

DeLay was not convinced that Ebola can only be contracted by contact with the bodily fluids of an infected person, pointing to the infection of NBC cameraman Ashoka Mukpo in Liberia to ask "was he touching people's bodily fluids, did he touch a doorknob?"(Mukpo thinks he may have become infected after washing a car in which an Ebola patient had died.)

"We know nothing," DeLay said, "so we can't believe what they're telling us and certainly we can't be confident that they're doing the right thing":

The Bible Code Definitively Proves Obama Is The Antichrist!

An “analyst” trained in the very, very discredited “Bible Code” method, which tries to predict future events through letters in the Bible, has come out with some big news: President Obama is in the Bible Code, and he is probably the Antichrist.

Bible Code-breaker Jonathan Wright appeared on “Trunews” last week, where he told host Rick Wiles that Obama is either the Antichrist or the harbinger of the Antichrist. Not only does the Bible Code prove this to be the case, says Wright, but so does Obama’s non-existent Muslim wedding ring.

Wiles: So either Barack Obama is the Man of Sin, commonly known as the Antichrist, the Bible doesn’t say ‘Antichrist’ it says ‘Man of Sin.’
Wright: That’s right.
Wiles: Either Barack Obama is the Man of Sin or he is strongly connected to the Man of Sin or the spirit of Antichrist.
Wright: That’s right. Those are my only — I’ve tried to look at this as an investigation not with an agenda, by the way, but what I’ve come up with those have to be the possibilities. Let’s just face it, he’s got a ring on that says, ‘There’s no God but Allah and Mohammad is his Messenger.’ Now, by definition, that’s Antichrist.

As Wright explained, he searches for Obama’s name in the Bible Code alongside terms relating to Satan: “look up the ‘Man of Sin’ or ‘Beelzebub’ or any name that has a connection to Satan or Lucifer and then go and see if there’s a connection to him, and usually they both confirm, back and forth the same thing.”

He also found a “strong connection” between Obama’s name and the word “Beast,” which as Wiles notes, just so happens to be the nickname of the presidential limousine!

The two also shared their belief that Obama is likely the Antichrist because a fly once landed on him, something that only has ever happened to Obama. “And there’s always the photos that you see everywhere with the flies landing on his face,” Wright told Wiles, “I can show you in the codes where he’s got a strong connection to the Lord of the Flies, Beelzebub.” 

“I call him Beelze-lip,” Wiles added. “Because he had those flies stuck to his lip.”

Wright insisted that he has “nothing against” Obama, he is just reporting on the unambiguous truth found in the Bible Code: “I really didn’t want the American president to be ‘the AC’ or the Man of Sin, it just looks like he’s the forerunner and we’re not looking for a needle in a stack of needles by the way.”

Supreme Court Action on Marriage Cases Is No Surprise

In last month's Supreme Court Term Preview, PFAW Foundation explained why most Justices might very well want to avoid taking the then-pending marriage cases.
PFAW Foundation

The Religious Right Reacts To SCOTUS Gay Marriage Decision: 'Unconscionable, Unconstitutional, And Un-American'

Earlier today, the Supreme Court refused to hear appeals from several states challenging court decisions striking down gay marriage bans, resulting in such marriages now being legal in several more states.

To say that anti-gay Religious Right groups are furious with the Supreme Court would be a massive understatement and nobody was more livid about it than the American Family Association's Bryan Fischer, who spent two segments of his radio program today blasting the Supreme Court for having now issued the "de facto Roe vs. Wade of sodomy-based marriage" by "imposing on every state in the union marriage that is based on the infamous crime against nature."

"It unconscionable, unconstitutional, and un-American," Fischer fumed:

Groups like Liberty Counsel were equally outraged, issuing a press release blasting the Court for its "decision to watch marriage burn to ashes:

"This is a total dereliction of duty," said Mat Staver, Founder and Chairman of Liberty Counsel. "The Supreme Court abandoned its duty to take up or at least hold these marriage cases. The responsibility for the undermining of marriage rests solely at the U.S. Supreme Court. Last year's decision in the Defense of Marriage Act case that started this fire, and today's decision to watch marriage burn to ashes is the responsibility of the Supreme Court. The actions of the Supreme Court in particular, and of the judiciary in general, undermine the rule of law and erode the confidence of the people in the judicial branch of government. When the people lose confidence in the rule of law, the judiciary will lose is legitimacy. Everyone will be affected by same-sex marriage because it is an intolerant agenda that will directly collide with religious freedom," said Staver.

The Family Research Council was likewise outraged, warning that "more and more people [will] lose their livelihoods because they refuse to not just tolerate but celebrate same-sex marriage":

"The Supreme Court decision to not take up these lower court rulings, which  undermine natural marriage and the rule of law, for now, puts the issue of marriage back before the US Congress.  This decision, in part, is an indication that those on the Court who desire to redefine natural marriage recognize the country will not accept a Roe v. Wade type decision on marriage.

"Unfortunately, by failing to take up these marriage cases, the High Court will allow rogue lower court judges who have ignored history and true legal precedent to silence the elected representatives of the people and the voice of the people themselves by overturning state provisions on marriage.   Even more alarming, lower court judges are undermining our form of government and the rights and freedoms of citizens to govern themselves.  This judicially led effort to force same sex 'marriage' on people will have negative consequences for our Republic, not only as it relates to natural marriage but also undermining the rule of and respect for law.

"The Court decision ensures that the debate over natural marriage will continue and the good news is that time is not on the side of those who want to redefine marriage.  As more states are forced to redefine marriage, contrary to nature and directly in conflict with the will of millions, more Americans will see and experience attacks on their religious freedom.   Parents will find a wedge being driven between them and their children as school curriculum is changed to contradict the morals parents are teaching their children.  As more and more people lose their livelihoods because they refuse to not just tolerate but celebrate same-sex marriage, Americans will see the true goal, which is for activists to use the Court to impose a redefinition of natural marriage on the entire nation.

"Congress should respond to today's announcement by moving forward with the State Marriage Defense Act, which is consistent with last year's Windsor ruling and ensures that the federal government in its definition of marriage respects the duly enacted marriage laws of the states," concluded Perkins.

As was the National Organization for Marriage, which called for the passage of a national marriage amendment:

"We are surprised and extremely disappointed that the US Supreme Court has refused to grant review of the same-sex marriage cases pending before them. This is wrong on so many levels. First, the entire idea that marriage can be redefined from the bench is illegitimate. Marriage is the union of one man and one woman; it has been this throughout the history of civilization and will remain this no matter what unelected judges say. Second, it's mind-boggling that lower court judges would be allowed to impose the redefinition of marriage in these states, and our highest court would have nothing to say about it. Third, the effect of the lower court rulings is to say that a constitutional right to same-sex ‘marriage' has existed in every state in the union since 1868 when the 14th Amendment was ratified, but somehow nobody noticed until quite recently. That's the absurd belief we are being told to accept.

"It's possible that the Supreme Court wants to wait to take a case when a Circuit split develops so that it can rule in favor of the people's right to define marriage as it has always been defined. We're hopeful that the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals will rule in our favor and that the Supreme Court will then take that case and decide that marriage is not unconstitutional.

"At the same time, given what the Supreme Court has allowed to happen, the only alternative to letting unelected judges impose their view of marriage on Americans across the country is to pursue a process that will allow the American people to decide for themselves what is marriage. It is critical not only to marriage but to the republican form of government in this country to amend the Constitution to reaffirm the meaning of marriage. We therefore call on the US Congress to move forward immediately to send a federal marriage amendment to the states for ratification.

"We call upon Americans vigorously to contest this development by turning to the political process, starting with the upcoming mid-term elections. We urge voters to hold politicians accountable and demand to know if they will accept the illegitimate act of attempting to redefine marriage or whether they will stand with the American people to resist. In particular, we urge Republicans to hold their party leaders to account, and to demand that they remain true to their belief that marriage is the union of one man and one woman which was a pillar of the party's founding in 1856, and remains essential to society's well-being today.

Focus on the Family warned that it will result in a "further expansion of threats to religious freedom"

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision not to accept five state marriage cases sets the stage for the further spread of same-sex marriage, and with it, a further expansion of threats to religious freedom.

Marriage has always been – and will always be – between a man and a woman.  Ultimately, no court can change that truth.  So regardless of legal outcomes, we’ll continue to address the importance of one-man, one-woman marriage to families, society and especially for children who have a right to both a mother and a father.

Our concern continues to be for children who deserve to grow up with both a mom and a dad, as well as for the religious freedom rights of people who strongly believe in God’s design for marriage and want to live consistently with those beliefs.

Ralph Reed's Faith and Freedom Coalition called the decision a "miscarriage of justice" and warned that the Supreme Court will "reap a political whirlwind":

Today’s Supreme Court decision not to hear appeals of lower-court rulings that legalized same-sex marriage in five states is a miscarriage of justice that lays the predicate for a Roe v. Wade decision on marriage that will impose same-sex marriage on the entire country by judicial fiat.  The Court’s action has the effect of overturning the will of the voters in Indiana, Virginia, Utah, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin, including instances in which state constitutions were amended to codify marriage as the union between a man and a woman.  Today’s decision further insures that the marriage issue will motivate and mobilize voters of faith who are concerned about marriage and deeply resent having the institution redefined contrary to the clearly expressed will of the people by federal judges who legislate from the bench.  For candidates running in 2014 and those who run for president in 2016, there will be no avoiding this issue.  If the Supreme Court is planning a Roe v. Wade on marriage, it will sow the wind and reap a political whirlwind.

The Florida Family Policy Council's John Stemberger warned that "Supreme Court risks losing enormous institutional legitimacy" if it rules in favor of gay marriage:

Over the last 15 years, more than 40 million Americans in more than 30 states have voted at the ballot box to define marriage as one man and one woman – the same definition of marriage used worldwide. In the last nano-second of human civilization, some U.S. judges have attempted to ignore and erase those votes. The Supreme Court risks losing enormous institutional legitimacy if they ignore biology, logic, anthropology, social science and the collective wisdom of human history, and overturn an act of direct democracy by such an overwhelming number of American voters who protected marriage in their state constitutions.

Marriage is about more than who you love; it’s about bringing together the two great halves of humanity, male and female-- not gay and straight. Also it’s important to recognize that legalizing same-sex marriage ignores and eliminates the importance of gender in society: it costs kids either a mom or a dad (who are not interchangeable), and it costs people of faith their First Amendment rights as government imposes the new definition across all aspects of society. States and counties that have so-called “non-discrimination” laws which cover sexual orientation are being used as weapons to punish people of faith, and mainly Christians, for failure to facilitate or host same sex marriage ceremonies. We as a state and a society need to carefully count those costs before we run headlong into this latest social experiment with marriage, which will have negative impact on so many areas of life and law."

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious