Pirate's Cove

The same sex marriage social justice warriors will tell us that religious folks have absolutely nothing to worry about! That a decrease of religious liberty will never happen!

Religious liberty is rallying cry after gay marriage ruling

Now that same-sex marriage is legal nationwide, religious conservatives are focusing on preserving their right to object. Their concerns are for the thousands of faith-based charities, colleges and hospitals that want to hire, fire, serve and set policy according to their religious beliefs, notably that gay relationships are morally wrong.

The Republican Party’s 2016 presidential candidates are already campaigning on the issue. And Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker is urging President Barack Obama and the nation’s governors “to join me in reassuring millions of Americans that the government will not force them to participate in activities that violate their deeply held religious beliefs.”

The religious liberty fight isn’t about what happens inside the sanctuary. First Amendment protections for worship and clergy are clear. Potential conflicts could arise, however, over religious organizations with some business in the public arena. That category ranges from small religious associations that rent reception halls to the public, to the nation’s massive network of faith-based social service agencies that receive millions of dollars in government grants. Some groups, such as the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, also want protections for individual business owners who consider it immoral to provide benefits for the same-sex spouse of an employee or cater gay weddings.

Are 1st Amendment protections that clear? It sure doesn’t seem so. Could there be a law passed and/or a court ruling that forces churches to marry gays? The Danes passed a law in 2012 requiring all churches to perform gay marriages, though the priests/pastors can refuse to perform the ceremony themselves. The church must find a replacement to perform the ceremony if they do object, though.

In 2014, a uber-rich gay couple sued to force their church to perform a marriage ceremony for them. I’m not finding a ruling on the suit yet, but, consider these lines

“It is a shame that we are forced to take Christians into a court to get them to recognize us. It upsets me because I want it so much—a big lavish ceremony, the whole works. I just don’t think it is going to happen straight away. While same-sex marriage is now legal in the U.K. after a bill cleared Parliament earlier this year, the legislation still protects the right of churches to opt out of performing gay weddings, specifically the Church of England.

Drewitt-Barlow is not pleased with the law, and said, “As much as people are saying this is a good thing, I am still not getting what I want.”

Churches can opt out of performing same sex marriages, while other religious groups cannot. They want to change that, and force churches to perform the ceremonies, because they aren’t getting what they want. They feel they ” have the right as parishioners in our village to utilise the church we attend to get married.” What the church feels is obviously of no consequence. But, hey, that’s England and Denmark. They don’t have the same protections as we do, right?

In Canada, “Commissioner of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Chai R. Feldblum, was questioned about instances when religious liberty and homosexual “rights” conflict.  She stated that she would have “a hard time coming up with any case in which religious liberty should win.”

Right now, people of belief can be forced to give up their religious liberty to accommodate the gay agenda. Baking cakes, catering gay weddings, even performing them if not a fully recognized church can be forced compliance. Or, deal with legal penalties, including from the government.

But in his dissent, Chief Justice John Roberts predicted a clash ahead between religious freedom and same-sex marriage. He specifically noted the dilemma for religious colleges that provide married student housing, and adoption agencies that won’t place children with gay couples.

“There is little doubt that these and similar questions will soon be before this court,” Roberts wrote.

Yes, they will. The agenda will never end. Forced compliance under penalty of law for those with religious conviction, because the SSM crowd can’t just accept their win gracefully. They always want more.

Alito noted the high court’s 1983 decision to revoke the tax-exemption of Bob Jones University in South Carolina because it barred interracial dating. Alito asked if the government would take such action against religiously affiliated schools that oppose same-sex marriage. Verrilli said, “It is certainly going to be an issue. I don’t deny that.”

Liberals are already very upset over the tax free status of churches, and will be coming after it, as well as anything else that stands for religious liberty. You will be made to care. And comply.

Crossed at Right Wing News.