SCOTUS Warned to Leave Marriage Alone

From WND


Thousands of signers of a new marriage pledge, including leaders of Christian organizations representing millions, are warning the justices on the U.S. Supreme Court to leave marriage alone.

No “redefinition.” No “gay marriage.” No nothing.

“We will view any decision by the Supreme Court [overturning traditional marriage] or any court the same way history views the Dred Scott and Buck v. Bell decisions. Our highest respect for the rule of law requires that we not respect an unjust law that directly conflicts with higher law,” says a Marriage Pledge that was assembled by Keith Fournier, a Catholic deacon who is editor of Catholic Online, and Mat Staver, founder of Liberty Counsel.

“A decision purporting to redefine marriage flies in the face of the Constitution and is contrary to the natural created order. As people of faith we pledge obedience to our Creator when the state directly conflicts with higher law.

“We respectfully warn the Supreme Court not to cross this line.”

The justices are scheduled on Tuesday to hear arguments in a case that was elevated from the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. That decision said that residents of states have the right to define marriage for themselves, and the judges would not do it.

supreme courtBut that flies in the face of the pro-homosexual activism that has enveloped America over recent years, and even the agenda pursued by Barack Obama in the White House, given his pursuit of open homosexuality in the U.S. military and more.

“We stand united together in defense of marriage,” the pledge states. “Make no mistake about our resolve. While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the common good that this is a line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross.”

The warning to classify an adverse decision regarding marriage along with Dred Scott and Buck brings to the fore of the argument the fact that the Supreme Court has, in fact, released decisions in the past that properly horrify contemporary Americans.

In Dred Scott, an earlier generation of justices found “blacks are inferior human beings.” And in Buck, the ruling allowed forced government sterilization of specific individuals because “three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

Thousands of Americans have signed onto the pledge, including those with considerable followings, such as Franklin Graham of Samaritan’s Purse, Gov. Mike Huckabee, James Dobson of Family Talk Action, Sen. Rick Santorum, Father Frank Pavone of Priests for Life, Penny Nance of Concerned Women for America. Rich Bott of Bott Radio Network, Jonathan Cahn, author of “The Harbinger,” Don Wildmon of American Family Association, Richard Land of the Southern Evangelical Seminary, Judson Phillips of Tea Party Nation, and more.

Some of the leaders’ constituencies can be numbered in the hundreds of thousands or even millions.

Co-author Mat Staver wrote at that, “I argued that a bad court decision might require civil disobedience. I still pray that won’t be necessary. I pray the Supreme Court will allow states to recognize natural marriage. That would be a great victory for truth, but it would not end the fight. Neither the Supreme Court nor any state has the authority to redefine the natural created order of marriage. Marriage is no more a state’s rights issue than is slavery or the law of gravity.”

“This is the redline we will not cross,” Staver wrote. “While no one wants this conflict, we have no choice but to resist an unjust law, particularly one that will force us to participate in acts that directly conflict with the Natural and Revealed Law.”


Strong words from some well-respected people who sound like they’re ready for more than a verbal battle over this issue.

Some of the states wouldn’t rule on this so it went to the Supremes, and it’s my guess they’ll kick it back to the states in order to avoid making a decision, especially a wrong one that could bring on that SHTF moment. How ironic that it could begin with staunch upstanding Christian leaders.

Buchanan went on to say…

“This battle can be won, but it cannot be won if we do not stand our ground and fight against this moral onslaught from the left,” he said. “The hill to stand on and fight on is the God-given natural right and the constitutional principle that people of faith may choose not to associate with those whose actions are abhorrent and whose lifestyle is insulting and offensive to that faith.”

He dismissed arguments that “gay”-rights activists are simply asking for political freedom or the same rights as any other citizen.

“The LGBT militants are not asking to be left alone,” he said. “They are demanding that we accept the morality of homosexuality and same-sex marriages, and manifest that acceptance, under pain of law and sanctions, in our daily lives.”

It will be interesting to see what the justices decide and where the religious leaders take it.


Tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

19 Responses to SCOTUS Warned to Leave Marriage Alone

  1. Uriel says:

    True Kathy. The issue of SANCTITY of marriage is a true basic one. Those who had issue with it before all this began tried for the most part to turn a blind eye to sexual preference but have had to rethink their attitude with the intrusion into marriage. With the crusade under way now to harm any who do not accept gay marriage because of religious belief or the swell of anti-christian rants and fear, people Have reached a line of demarcation. Christians are being called on to stand by their faith. What comes from this will be horrendous and far reaching for all involved. Activists are using gay rights to push a far more dangerous agenda of marginalizing and threatening individual beliefs while destroying the constitution.

    • Kathy says:

      They’ve gone from asking for equal treatment to demanding special treatment. Should SCOTUS rule on the side of traditional marriage, they’ll riot in the streets.

      • Uriel says:

        It is obvious Kathy WHO and for what reason is backing normal folk to be irrational–same with police crap going on now–Something or someone is pushing this chaos but tracing Source is critical to finding purpose. In all reports one thing remains the same — UNKNOWN people are showing up to create the violence. Both in police confrontations and in every instance Those are the ones needed. Take the flag burning at VSU. Who was the main guy and who did he work for, Ferguson. Same. Note who steps up to pressure the issue. Even cops are suspect. No different than a suicide bomber. Weapons of jihad come in all forms. We know all justice has people in them planted for purpose.

        • Uriel says:

          No one has told us what happened or why the gay couples chose those businesses to cause the disruption. Same with the rest. Who and why started and why was there someone conveniently there to witness a setup drama?

          • Kathy says:

            I don’t know Uriel, but to wreck someone’s business over a cake, or a pizza, or whatever is spiteful and mean, whatever persuasion a person might be.

      • upaces88 says:

        We are all being ignored. They are supposedly very educated . This is a toxic version of Bush’s “Trickle Down Effect.” Changing basic beliefs for ALL of our country is undermining all of us.

  2. Buck says:

    I have been saying all along the homosexuals are demanding we accept their immoral and perverted lives. I have nothing against two people having a civil union but to demand that a leader of a religious faith perform a religious ceremony for a homosexual’s, ‘in your face’ against the Christian world is wrong, wrong, wrong.

  3. tannngl says:

    I sure agree with Uriel’s comments, Kathy.

    I appreciate the post on this. For some reason I don’t receive WND emails anymore. And this one is important.

    I’m so glad to see someone is trying to stand for the religious rights of Christians. It’s so hard to understand how quickly our country has gone from basis of Judeo-Christian faith to a communist, atheist, ‘do whatever feels good’ society that is fracturing and disintegrating. It makes me physically ill.

    I guess this particular road isn’t going to get any easier. I’ll be very interested in what the Supremes have to say in June.
    (I think I read that there were thousands in DC this weekend rallying for religious rights. Do you think that was this group?)

  4. Kathy says:

    If they side with the deviants, there might be hell to pay from the Christians, from the sound of it. They’re tired of being pushed around and have drawn the line.

    Same here, tannngl, but it drives me crazy that it takes them so long to announce their decision.

  5. Shane Solano says:

    You lost the Culture War…deal w/it…

    • Kathy says:

      There should never have been a war, but there is nonetheless, and I refuse to accept defeat. That’s not what this country was founded on.

    • CW says:

      Actually, we didn’t lose the culture war. If culture is determined by the people, then the will of the people is typically against same-sex marriage. That’s how these things keep ending up in court, because the Left can’t “deal with it” and despite being in the minority they try to bully their way to what they want via the courts. That’s the liberal way.

    • Uriel says:

      This is not about culture Shane. Never has been–that is where most people are wanting to place the war (if you chose to use that word) because it is easier to understand. It is about manipulation and using striking points to create chaos for a far deeper purpose of one world dominance.

    • Hardnox says:

      Hey Shane… go pound sand. We haven’t lost a damned thing. We won’t either. The left will use the courts as a vehicle to wage legal terrorism because it is the only way for them to win a battle and that is by force.

      Next step is forcing religious institutions to perform marriages. Not gonna happen.

  6. vonMesser says:

    I’m afraid that Shane might be right. If we haven’t lost, we’re in the same position England was at on June 5, 1940 – right after Dunkirk. A long road ahead before victory, and not one that can be won without outside help.

  7. CW says:

    Pat Buchanan is absolutely right on this one.

    The entire same-sex marriage fight is about one thing – the leftists seeing if they can make the rest of the country bend to their will. Why? Because they can. How do I know this? Because the VERY SAME people used to tell us that marriage wasn’t important at all. It was just a piece of paper. Remember that? The children were defying the adults. But that got boring and they needed a new fight, and as always the kiddos really don’t care what has to be sacrificed so they can prove to us how powerful they are.

    • Kathy says:

      This issue was spelled out clearly in the Big Book, upon which our government is founded, therefore it should never have needed a ruling, either from the state or the federal level.

      It’s become an extreme case of that old whine you hear from so many – ‘the government needs to do something about this’. When you look to the government for a fix, you’d better prepare for something other than the response you wanted and expected.

      Instead of the states taking responsibility and fixing it themselves, they passed the buck back to the feds. Not everyone is going to agree with what they decide and either way, it could have devastating effects.

  8. Hardnox says:

    Good to see some pushback on this issue for a change. It’s about time.

    If marriage was the actual issue why then isn’t there a huge population of married homos in the states that allow it? Other than the initial surge after a state passes a law the marriage rate flatlines. The results don’t support the constant whine of the left and homos in particular. The bottom line is that homos want to legal legitimization of their proclivities and special protections protected by federal law.

    It’s a states’ issue. If it were under federal purview then the feds would have been in the marriage license business long ago. Further, there is no mention of “marriage’ in the Constitution. However, it is in many state’s constitutions.

    I am beyond tired of having less than 2% of the population telling the other 98+% what normal is. It’s bullshit and a strawman argument.

    If homos want rights and tax benefits then a civil union will do that. It’s an easy fix legislatively at both state and federal levels. The homos know it but want special protections as if this were a 14th amendment issue. Tough shit, they’re not getting it.

    Lastly, know one that I know is anti-homo. It’s been around forever. No one cares what someone does in the privacy of their own home, BUT we are tired of being told what “normal” is. We’re not buying it. We’re also not accepting the idea of being forced to accept it either. Marriage has been cheapened enough already.

    End of rant. Sorry. This pisses me off.