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.
But 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 Stream.org 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.