“We’ve been very good at getting heart, lung, liver, because we know that, so I’m not going to crush that part, I’m going to basically crush below, I’m going to crush above, and I’m going to see if I can get it . . . Continue reading →
Same-sex marriage advocates insist that the court’s Obergefell ruling is not like Roe v. Wade, which engendered undying controversy, but like Loving v. Virginia, the universally accepted decision that struck down bans on interracial marriage—a decision now so uncontroversial that most Americans . . . Continue reading →
In a broader context what this means is the privatization (or, if you will, the domestication) of religion. There is an underlying, unspoken (perhaps unconscious) assumption: Religion is okay if engaged in by consenting adults in private, not so if it spills . . . Continue reading →
When one judge asked whether an oil painter had to create a painting celebrating same-sex marriage, an ACLU lawyer replied yes, Tedesco noted. “And if they don’t want to have to do that, then they can close down their business and just . . . Continue reading →
According to the 2015 State of the First Amendment Survey: When asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 57% of Americans name freedom of speech, followed by 19% who say the freedom of religion, 10% mention the freedom . . . Continue reading →
Bob Godfrey recently recorded two episodes of Abounding Grace Radio with my pastor and friend, Chris Gordon. They were discussing how Christians ought to respond to the recent SCOTUS decision (Obergefell v Hodges) decision legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states. Here . . . Continue reading →
The handwriting is on the wall. You need only reflect on how a screaming mob managed to conjure up total surrender from Indiana Gov. Mike Pence so he would reject that state’s Religious Freedom Restoration Act. Catholic Charities is closing its adoption . . . Continue reading →
Today’s decision usurps the constitutional right of the people to decide whether to keep or alter the traditional understanding of marriage. The decision will also have other important consequences. It will be used to vilify Americans who are unwilling to assent to . . . Continue reading →
A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Continue reading →
A majority of the honorable Supreme Court of the United States has recently judged that, whereas as recently as 2013 the court had asserted that marriage law is the province of the states, homosexuals have a constitutional right under the 14th amendment to . . . Continue reading →
By history and tradition the definition and regulation of marriage has been treated as being within the authority and realm of the separate States. Congress has enacted discrete statutes to regulate the meaning of marriage in order to further federal policy, but . . . Continue reading →
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws . . . Continue reading →
Numerous amici—even some not supporting the States—have cautioned the Court that its decision here will “have unavoidable and wide-ranging implications for religious liberty.” Brief for General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists et al. as Amici Curiae 5. In our society, marriage is not simply a governmental institution; it is a religious institution as well. Id., at 7. Today’s decision might change the former, but it cannot change the latter. It appears all but inevitable that the two will come into conflict, particularly as individuals and churches are confronted with demands to participate in and endorse civil marriages between same-sex couples. Continue reading →
The colonists brought the principles of Magna Carta with them to the New World, including that charter’s protection against uncompensated takings of personal property. In 1641, for example, Massachusetts adopted its Body of Liberties, prohibiting “mans Cattel or goods of what kinde . . . Continue reading →
To reduce this verse to material poverty is to fail to grasp the significance of Christ’s incarnation. Money has nothing to do with the gospel. When Francis says material poverty is integral to the gospel, he is robbing people of the true . . . Continue reading →
The First Amendment Defense Act follows our nation’s long tradition of protecting the natural right to the free exercise of religion and freedom of association as enshrined in our Constitution. It ensures that the federal government respects the rights of individuals, businesses . . . Continue reading →
Today, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Good News Community Church, concluding that these sign restrictions are content-based regulation because they define the categories of temporary, political and ideological signs on the basis of their messages and subject each category . . . Continue reading →
All of that and more promotes the semantic fog that allows for mind rape. It amounts to an act of “logicide,” to borrow a term from Meerloo, whom I will continue to quote below. To kill logic and reason that might stand . . . Continue reading →
The Emory Law Journal has a symposium on the constitution and polygamous marriage. Some articles are on whether the government may criminalize adults entering into polygamous religious marriages, even when the parties aren’t claiming any legal rights stemming from such a marriage. . . . Continue reading →