Posted on 03/27/2013 11:05:49 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: This is Colleen in Dagsboro, Delaware. Welcome to the EIB Network. Hello.
CALLER: Hi there, Rush. Thanks for taking my call. I was just calling because this whole gay marriage before the Supreme Court, my worry is that if they decide it is a right, then does that mean they are going to force churches like the Catholic Church to perform weddings just like they forced Obamacare and abortion and birth control?
RUSH: Well, I don't think anybody knows. If there is such a desire to also attack the structure of the Catholic Church, then that would be something that would happen down the road. Once the concept of gay marriage, homosexual marriage, is sanctioned and made legal, then, if a religion or an individual church refuses to perform the ceremony, then there could well be a lawsuit. And then it would depend on how a judge felt about it. So it's theoretically possible, yeah. I mean, look. If the Catholic Church can be forced to give away abortifacients and birth control pills, why can't the church be forced to marry gay couples who want the sacrament?
CALLER: Or any church really.
RUSH: Any church, right, any church.
CALLER: Then would they be, you know, attacked because then it would be discrimination?
RUSH: Exactly. But I think it's a pretty safe bet that that kind of thing will happen. I mean, among militant leftists, attacking organized religion is part of the political agenda, whether they're gay or not......
(Excerpt) Read more at rushlimbaugh.com ...
It can't.
"...nor prohibit the free exercise thereof."
Slam dunk 1st Amendment case.
I don't think the amendments mean anything now.
In a sane country, that would be true. With Odumbo and the Rats, we live in a very insane country, whose leaders have never paid any attention to the constitution.
That’s my primary concern is coercion of religious conscious and depressing free speech and suppressing that speech at the pulpit, regards to what the Bible tells us.
That and the culture of one man, one woman in poetry, song, literature and portraits, even statuary.
They aren’t that far from going there.
That and the culture of one man, one woman in poetry, song, literature and portraits, even statuary.
They aren’t that far from going there.
I just had this horrid mental image of the lefties smashing and destroying (like the Taliban did with the Buddha statues) any statuary or other artwork that celebrates the union of man and woman.
The real punishment will be imposedt by the government, all right.
Think what will happen to the numbers of churches, and to the numbers of church members, when the federal tax exempton is revoked.
That’s the next step.
You haven’t seen the gay mafia infiltrate Catholics services on Sundaysddressed as nuns?
Its here.. They’re queer.
I can see discrimination lawsuits and the danger is some such lawsuit will be upheld.
Then removal of tax exempt status for any church that does not adopt political correctness.
One thing to watch is now the leftists talk about “freedom of worship” instead of “freedom of religion.” What does that mean? A couple of things. First of all, it means that okay, you might worship at church and express certain ideas there - that is “freedom of worship.” But once you step outside of church, you had better not practice your religion in society. You had better not let your religion inform your choices and actions once you are not in a church building. Your religion, if it is Christianity, had better be in the closet at all times. Freedom of worship means that if the Catholic or whatever church does not want to recognize gay marriages but a gay couple wants a gay marriage ceremony, there is no concept that the church is free to not recognize gay marriage under freedom of religion. Instead you have two competing “freedom of worships” the church’s desire not to have a gay wedding and the gay couple’s desire to have a gay wedding. What will happen is that it will be argued that the church is denying the gay couple the “freedom to worship” if the church does not perform a wedding ceremony for them. The idea of freedom of religion will be quietly swept aside while the counterfeit freedom of worship will be loudly proclaimed. So be on guard and don’t be confused or fooled. Do not have a false sense of security when the leftists talk about their dedication to freedom of “worship.” They intend to destroy freedom of religion, where the church is free to determine its doctrines and practices.
This is not hokum this whole thread.
On Dr. Bennett's Program yesterday, a caller noted it was discussed on NPR the civil law suits to churches who do not abide by the new "Supremes" mandates should they swing in favor of. This would be the Kidman family route if you will aka the Simpson Trial, get-um civilly.
You brought up so many good points in your thread, but I fear we are headed in the direction of the secret ceremony in the woods in the movie "Braveheart", underground Churches are next IMHO....
This is already the case in Canada where hate speech laws have caused pastors to be tried for preaching against homosexuality.
I suppose this could irrepairably damage heavily structured older liturgical churches such as Catholics, Episcopals, etc.; however, I suspect a lot of fundamentalist churches would simply go underground, much like the 1st century church was. It is what it is.....persecution plain and simple.
It wouldn’t surprise me. This is EXACTLY what they did to major corporations, including my former one. Militants sue for discrimination, get awards, company changes policy to be more politically correct, infests the ‘ethics’ training programs with ‘case studies’ that we all had to watch, managers and workers go to ‘sensitivity’ training...and a whole new grievance industry is spawned in the name of ‘Diversity’. What about the hostile work environment I found myself I???? As a middle aged, white female, I was constantly bombarded with this crap. Even worse for middle age and older white males. One of a handful of my reasons for leaving..
i’m sorry, do you think they care about that? LOL
they know what they want, and they’re going to take it. whether or not it aligns with the Constitution is irrelevant. they’ll just make some bs up if they need to.
just look at something as simple as ‘natural born citizen’. they’ve pushed it to the point that if you were born in the US, and not sprung into being, you’re a NBC regardless of your family heritage.
That is interesting whether persecution will be more damaging to the liturgical churches. Well, I can imagine a fundamentalist type of church successfully working as an isolated (more or less) cell, as it were. A church with bishops, etc would have to be more exposed, it would seem. But the early church was fairly structured and survived under Roman persecution. And the liturgy started with Christians worshipping in caves and such. In my church they carry a cross in a procession and people bow as the cross goes by. This started as a mockery of the pagan Roman practice of carrying a symbol of the Emperor that people would bow to. I think it likely that Christianity will soon be persecuted like it was in Roman times and the only acceptable views will be atheism with the “worship” of some dictator or party and Islam. I just noticed that I started writing this on the assumption about what will happen WHEN persecution starts. I did not even think this is a hypothetical question. I am just thinking about when it will start and the quazi-legal arguments the persecutors will use.
Church pastors/priests are not required by law to perform marriages for everyone now. They can refuse to marry couples for any number of reasons. Some churches will not perform marriages for divorced people or people they deem as incompatible, abusive, or mentally or emotionally unstable, e.g..
It’s a pastor’s decision, not a guarantee. There are other methods of receiving a certificate of marriage besides a church ceremony.
And there are plenty of pastors who will perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples, so if it’s important to the couple to have a church ceremony, there is the option.
So I don’t see this being an issue.
I think the goal is more along the lines of what has happened in Canada.
It won’t just be churches. It will be photographers. It will be bakers.
What? Already? Nevermind.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.