Churches Brace for Same-Sex Marriage Ruling from Supreme Court

Wall Street Journal ^ | 04/29/2015 | Tamara Audi

[SeekAndFind]

Arguments over same-sex marriage played out in the U.S. Supreme Courton Tuesday, but many religious groups opposed to gay marriage aren’t waiting for a ruling.

A court ruling expected two months from now could sanction same-sex marriage nationwide. In anticipation, some congregations and religious advocacy groups are re-emphasizing their teachings on marriage, fine-tuning their approach to gays and lesbians and bracing for legal battles and public criticism.

“The outcome of this decision will shape the landscape of the church’s ministry in the U.S. for generations to come,” wrote Russell Moore, president of the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. In an interview, he added, “If we have a redefinition of marriage across the board by judicial decree then the church will have a responsibility more than ever to articulate what marriage is in the first place.”

The Southern Baptist Convention, the U.S.’s largest Protestant denomination, is preparing a video series and booklets on marriage and how to address homosexuality, Mr. Moore said. The church is hosting symposiums for pastors on “teaching the biblical witness to marriage” while also “equipping them to minister to gay and lesbian people who don’t agree with us,” he said.

Gay marriage is already legal in 36 states plus the District of Columbia, and the most recent Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll, released in March, showed support for gay marriage at an all-time high of 59%, nearly double the 30% support in 2004.

While many religious groups and congregations accept openly gay members, a segment of believers remains opposed to homosexuality and gay marriage and fears the ruling could further marginalize their position.

“We’ve reached a stage of vilification,” Wallace Henley a columnist for the Christian Post, wrote last week.

[kaehurowing]

Nor should any individual be forced to participate in one.

[Logical me]

Will true freedom rise again somewhere in the world?

Once America is gone, nope! And we are going fast!

[MrB]

Ya gotta understand that destroying Christian influence in our society (and world) is the whole point.
Gay “marriage” is but one method to do it for the left.

[left that other site]

Samaritan’s Purse, Catholic Schools and the like should have the right to refuse employment to those that, according to the beliefs of that organization, are “living in open sin”.

It’s called “Free exercise of religion” and is guaranteed in the constitution.

I know, I know. The PTBs have no respect for that anymore, but I still do.

[livius]

Huh? This article was meant to call attention to the danger, not to promote it.

[SeekAndFind]

RE: Samaritan’s Purse, Catholic Schools and the like should have the right to refuse employment to those that, according to the beliefs of that organization, are “living in open sin”.

Try using that argument in court today when a gay person sues you for refusing employment due to the protected “sexual orientation” class.

[left that other site]

Military Chaplains are already being disciplined for merely PRAYING IN THE NAME OF JESUS.

I hate what has happened to my country in the last seven years.

[left that other site]

Amen.

[MrB]

Ah, but we have seen a foretaste of that.

They will find those who don’t want to participate,
they will seek them out.

And they will use the State to force them to violate their Christian principles.

[left that other site]

I know, but it still isn’t right.

[Olog-hai]

Look at the comment I was replying to. The quote from the article cited therein reduces the religious opposition to SSM to “a segment”.

[tanknetter]

Alito asked that very question yesterday.

The Obama Admin’s answer, from the US Soliciter General, was that religious schools, etc that refuse to recognize same sex marriage will lose their tax exempt status.

[Yosemitest]

The solution to the HOMOSEXUAL PROBLEM is to OBEY GOD !
It is the ONLY SOLUTION that will work, and that will bring us prosperity ...and peace.

TO TOLERATE HOMOSEXUALS IS EVIL.
This is what we get when we FAIL to OBEY God.
For it is written:

“ For whosoever shall commit ANY of these abominations,
even the SOULS that commit them
SHALL BE CUT OFF from among their people. ”

Those who support homosexuals are against our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
These anti Christ people only bring destruction on us ALL.
I have NO sympathy for homosexuals!

Homosexuality is a "Mark" of disobedience.

It was given by our Heavenly Father to test us
to see ... if we will OBEY our Heavenly Father,
and abide by His commandments, statues, and ordinances.

Someone once asked

"Why are they [homosexuals] all so angry?"

The answer is in the definition of "REPROBATE".

rep·ro·bate \ˈre-prə-ˌbāt\ a. [L. reprobatus, reprobo, to disallow; re and probo, to prove.]

1. Not enduring proof or trial; not of standard purity or fineness; disallowed; rejected.


Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them. Jer. 6.




2. Abandoned in sin; lost to virtue or grace.

They profess that they know God, but in works deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate. Titus 1.

3. Abandoned to error, or in apostasy. 2Tim. 3.

And the reason"why" is given in the Bible.

God has a cure for homosexuals.

But will we OBEY our Heavenly Father?

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect
that God is just,
that his justice cannot sleep forever."

[livius]

I agree. The anti-Christians have finally found the perfect issue.

If the Supreme Court “approves” it, we’re going to be in big trouble, because it will become mandatory.

Another Freeper, Gaffer, made an excellent point, however: there is nothing that prohibits anyone of any sex or whatever from entering into a private agreement (that is, a contract) or even a civilly administered agreement (such as “domestic partnership”) that would enable them to have all the rights and responsibilities of a legally married heterosexual couple. Therefore, refusing to call their arrangement “marriage” and forcing churches to perform it does not violate their right to happiness in any way.

[MrB]

That was just brought up,
but the leftist activists would refuse it,
because the legal recognition of same sex unions is NOT the issue -

criminalizing Christianity is.

[Ransomed]

Can’t be said enough. They know their worst enemies simply can’t accept it, and they really don’t want them to. They want to be able to use the power of the state to punish and to be able to keep punishing. It’s the stick they won’t have to put down.

Freegards

[DannyTN]

"unlike “officiating” a wedding, baking a cake has never ever been defined as a religious sacrament"

That might be true, but it's expected as part of the wedding cake process that you deliver it to the ceremony, which makes you tangentially a participate in the wedding. And a wedding is a religious sacrament. T

There is also the expression part of a wedding cake, where the baker puts statuettes of the bride and groom on the cake. Putting two brides on a cake is an implicit declaration that you approve of ceremony.

Kentucky courts just ruled a Christian t-shirt maker did not have to produce a t-shirt with a message he disagreed with. Why is a baker held to a different standard when the medium is a cake instead of a t-shirt?

[DannyTN]

...which makes you tangentially a participant in the wedding. And a wedding is a religious sacrament. T

...that you approve of the ceremony.

Louisiana grammar meets cheap keyboard = gramatical error explosion

[Bob434]

bump for later read

[zlala]

if a baker can be forced to participate in a SSM ceremony, then why can't a minister be forced to preside over SSM. One's claim to religious objection should not be stronger than the other's by virtue of occupation.

Hadn't thought about it from this angle. Excellent comment IMO. Thanks for giving me a new talking point.