Tag: Supreme Court
Idaho: City Demands Pastor Perform Same-Sex Ceremony or Go to Jail!
Posted on October 21, 2014 in Marriage, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
The most recent example of course is the subpoena of pastor’s sermons in the city of Houston. Now called “The Houston 5,” a group of pastors that openly opposed the city’s transgender bathroom bill have been asked by the city to turn over all sermons, speeches, and communications relating to the bill and Mayor Annise Parker.
That statement should be terrifying to anyone that believes in the First Amendment and both free speech and religious freedom. To think that any government agency would consider – let alone follow through – asking pastors to turn over sermons is egregious at best. Sen. Ted Cruz reminded the city of Houston that “Caesar has no jurisdiction over the pulpit” in his comments at a press conference with pastors and religious freedom advocates:
“Caesar has no jurisdiction over the pulpit. And when you subpoena one pastor, you subpoena every pastor.”
Apparently a city in Idaho is taking this sentiment literally by demanding that a pastor perform same-sex weddings or face fines and jail time. An article at The Daily Caller explains:
In Light of the Supreme Court Decision Let’s Celebrate Endangering Health and Harming Kids
Posted on October 15, 2014 in Public Policy, Sexuality by Nathan Cherry
In light of the Supreme Court’s decision to reject appeals from five states concerning the issue of marriage, thereby effectively legalizing same-sex “marriage” in those five states, I found a couple of other articles interesting.
Shouting just below the clamor of those rejoicing at the Supreme Court’s decision, and the advancement of same-sex “marriage” in general, is the common sense warning signs of the dangers of this lifestyle. First are the physical/health dangers inherent within homosexuality.
According to a recent “Morbidity and Mortality” report by the Centers for Disease Control, while gay men make up just 2% of America’s population, they account for nearly two-thirds of all HIV cases. A recent article states:
Roundup: Supreme Court Takes One Step Closer to Legalizing Same-Sex “Marriage”
Posted on October 10, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
The Supreme Court has rejected appeals form five states, Indiana, Oklahoma, Utah, Virginia, and Wisconsin, regarding the issue of marriage. This, effectively, legalizes same-sex “marriage” in those states. Some believe the issue of marriage is destined for a ruling from the Supreme Court and this appeals rejection could signal how the court will rule. Up to this point the court has stopped short of legalizing same-sex “marriage” for all 50 states, but this appeals rejection opens up speculation on what the court will do in the future.
The following articles are a roundup of notable voices commenting on the appeals rejection by the Supreme Court.
The Blaze: Supreme Court Rejects Appeals From Five States Looking to Ban Gay Marriage
“The court’s order immediately ends delays on marriage in those states. Couples in six other states – Colorado, Kansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, West Virginia and Wyoming – should be able to get married in short order. Those states would be bound by the same appellate rulings that were put on hold pending the Supreme Court’s review. That would make same-sex marriage legal in 30 states and the District of Columbia.”
Will Legalizing Gay “Marriage” End the Culture Wars? Don’t Be Silly
Posted on September 4, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
No, no, no, no, no. Hoping the Supreme Court legalizes same-sex “marriage” in all fifty states is not a good idea. Yes, the issue is undoubtedly headed back to the high court and, yes, the court will be forced to rule whether or not individual states have the right to define marriage for themselves. But, to want the Supreme Court to decide for us all what the definition of marriage should be is an absurd proposition.
I get it, the writer of this article saying that such a decision by the high court would be a great thing for the Republican Party is thinking along secular political lines. His end game is a strengthened GOP that doesn’t have to deal with an unpopular cultural issue. Nonetheless, not only do I think it is a political strategy nightmare, I think it’s a moral disaster of epic proportions.
The writer starts off his support for a Supreme Court decision by saying: “Like it or not, opponents of gay marriage are losing the battle…A substantial majority of voters now support it, 59 percent in the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll.”
Roundup: Notable Voices Regarding the New HHS Mandate in Light of the Supreme Court Ruling in Favor of Hobby Lobby
Posted on August 29, 2014 in Life, Religious Freedom by Nathan Cherry
After the Supreme Court dealt a devastating blow to the Obama Administration’s HHS mandate, the administration promised a “fix” to make it all legal. True to their promise a new HHS mandate “fix” was released last week. Unfortunately, the new “fix” does nothing to protect the religious conscience and convictions of business owners and religious organizations.
The following articles provide a detailed analysis of the new “fix” and why it’s really nothing new and doesn’t really fix anything. Stay informed about this very critical issue. At stake is the ability for business owners to live and do business according to their religious convictions without fear of government reprisal. This is important because religious freedom is a cornerstone of our country. If the government can force a business owner to violate his/her religious convictions it won’t be long before every person can and will be made to do the same.
ADF COMMENT ON HHS MANDATE ‘ACCOMMODATION’
Shock! State Marriage Amendment Stands Against Court Challenge
Posted on August 27, 2014 in Marriage, Public Policy by Nathan Cherry
Imagine my shock when I read that a state’s marriage amendment defining marriage as the union of one woman and one man was upheld in a federal court.
It’s not that I think such amendments aren’t Constitutional, quite the opposite. In fact I believe that each state has the sovereign right to decide for itself what the definition of marriage will be. I believe the federal government should stay out of the debate between states and refuse to interfere in the decision each state will make. I believe the people of each state – not a court or a single judge – should make the decision.
So my shock has nothing to do with the constitutionality of such amendments. Instead, my shock is that a federal court would actually uphold the will of the people rather than trample all over it as so many have already done.
A post at ScotusBlog reports:
Has the Supreme Court Already Decided the Definition of Marriage for America?
Posted on August 26, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
Here’s an important question we need to answer. Is there a Constitutional right to same-sex “marriage”?
If a Constitutional right exists then it should end all the debate. The Supreme Court should simply cite the Constitution and the entire issue will be settled. And yet, when they had the chance not even the Supreme Court was willing to say that such a right exists. That leaves me wondering whether such a right – as some activists claim – is reasonable.
One of the most important court decisions concerning the definition of marriage has been issued and you probably didn’t even know it. Not only did the media fail to cover the decision adequately, but the fact that it took place in Europe made it a little harder to hear about. But, let me share a brief recap to ensure you are up to speed with this monumental decision. Here’s a recap as reported by Alliance Defending Freedom:
More Judges. More Marriage Amendments Struck Down. More Confusion Over the 14th Amendment.
Posted on August 5, 2014 in Marriage by Nathan Cherry
So here we are, reading the news that yet another judge has struck down another voter-approved marriage protection amendment. This time both Virginia and Florida watched as judges simply tossed the voters’ voice aside and decided for the entire state what the definition of marriage will be. And the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, another group of judges, has decided that Oklahoma’s marriage protection amendment is unconstitutional struck it down.
That’s three more traditionally conservative states where LGBT activists and politicians alike had little chance of getting a voter-approved measure legalizing gay “marriage” past the people. So, they circumvented the people, trampled both the Constitution and the voter-approved marriage protection amendments, and forced their will on the entire state.
Jill Stanek: 15 Reasons Why the Pro-Life Movement is Winning!
Posted on July 29, 2014 in Life by Nathan Cherry
If you weren’t sure if the movement to defend life from conception to natural death was winning or not, the following list should help. Of course the media is in bed with big abortion business so their coverage is skewed to make people think the pro-abortion view is most popular. Wrong.
As Stanek shares, from a number of articles which can be seen here, there is overwhelming evidence to support the fact that the pro-life view is not just winning in courts, but winning in the court of public opinion. More people in America now identify as pro-life and believe abortion should be restricted to extreme cases. The push to protect children with disabilities, children of rape and incest, and even to protect children based on their gender is growing, quickly.
Despite the fact that we have the most pro-abortion president in U.S. history in the White House, more pro-life laws have been passed in the past several years than in the past three decades combined. Despite the media partnership with big abortion business people remain unconvinced that abortion is not murder. As many pro-abortion advocates rightly feared, science is proving the humanity of the unborn in undeniable ways; convincing people more than ever that human life does indeed begin at conception.
Based on the articles Jill Stanek lists in her post at LifeNews.com, here are the 15 reasons abortion advocates say they are losing to the pro-life movement:
Breaking: Democratic Bill to Overturn Hobby Lobby Decision Fails
Posted on July 17, 2014 in Life by Nathan Cherry
The Supreme Court recognized the need to protect the religious freedoms of business owners in not forcing them to violate their conviction by supporting abortion. The extreme abortion-rights position of the left was in plain view in even considering a bill like this.
Records show that our very own John Rockefeller was a co-sponsor of the bill, but it appears Joe Manchin was not. However, both Joe Manchin and John Rockefeller voted in favor of the bill and support forcing employers to violate their religious convictions. THankfully John Rockefeller is retiring and will most likely be replaced by pro-life Shelley Moore-Capito. At least we (West Viriginia) will have one Senator that is not pro-life in name and words only.
Sen. Orrin Hatch said of the bill: