“Six of the Supreme Court Justices are Roman Catholics. I’m pretty sure they aren’t going to rule that Catholic priests must marry same-sex couples”
It has nothing to do with whether they are Catholic or not. It would be a clear violation of the Constitution to “make” the RCC marry same-sex couples, just as it would be a clear violation of the Constitution to “make” the RCC admit women to the priesthood. It’s just not going to happen. It’s a hole so big you could drive a truck through it. It has nothing to do with the personal religious traditions of the justices.
You are missing that some people think that any “attack on marriage” is an attack on their religious freedom. Period.
It is just like coming into their church and saying they must marry same sex couples.
Which it is not, it only obviously applies to the marriage license issued by the government.
I do know people who feel the issues are EXACTLY the same - not as tolerant as stugace by any means, but thinking the SCOTUS is attacking their religion.
You and I might be abundantly clear on the difference, but some people are not.
" The government can’t tell a religion that it has to recognize X marriage type. It’s about what the GOVERNMENT recognizes. There is no parallel here between a legal marriage and women priests. "
THERE IS to some people - THERE ISN’T in reality.
We won’t even GO near why some people think their religion trumps other people’s rights, and why some people think that their religion trumps government agency.
Well, those people are wrong, though. That’s their problem if they “think” that this means the church has to marry same-sex couples when no such thing is happening, at all.
^Pizzagirl, plenty of people are fully expecting the gendarmes to start rounding up Christians in boxcars and carting them off. Not to mention God deciding this is just the last straw and hailing down flaming meteors on us all. I’m sure some of them will be sorely disappointed when the sun rises tomorrow just like it did today.
some idiot preacher in Texas (where else?) recently said that Christians in the US were facing persecution because of the (then expected) same sex marriage ruling and that their plight was equivalent to the Jews in the holocaust, which rightfully got a lot of people very very angry (sorry, if Christians feel that same sex marriage being legal makes them persecuted, they need to look at what the Jews faced before saying something so stupid). I have heard it, how the government is going to take away the tax exempt status of churches that won’t marry gays, how they won’t be able to practice their faith, you got it. A lot of it, quite frankly, is much the same as those who bemoaned the end of Jim Crow and with it, where it was socially acceptable to be openly racist, I think what they fear is that their religious beliefs expressed openly will be as socially acceptable as being racist. For one thing, they know that after this court decision, when the world doesn’t end, when Jesus doesn’t follow the flaming chariots of the end of days, when people realize same sex couples being married doesn’t affect them one way or the other,that like after the Loving decision, you will see an even larger percent of the population supporting it (I would guess it will hit 80% within a year or two, leaving only the hardcore religious believers in an even smaller minority than today).
My answer to those people would maybe they should concentrate on their own lives, try to live into their faith the way it says you are supposed to, and leave the rest to God to decide, not the law, and not themselves for that matter. Last I checked, Christianity teaches we are supposed to love fellow people as ourselves, and the rest is up to God.
MODERATOR’S NOTE:
For the benefit of those who did not understand the subtlety of my earlier post - enough with the political posts - they will just be deleted and the violators warned.
Great News but also having trouble believing that there are four Supreme Court Justices on the other side of this issue. kind of disappointing. Has there ever been a unanimous decision by the SCOTUS?
@3bm103 thankfully, not every decision is this political. 9-0 decisions aren’t exceptionally rare in history, although recent courts have perhaps been more divided than usual
I’m just a bit sad that my state is delaying issuing marriage licenses for 25 days “just in case SCOTUS decides to rehear the issue”. Sigh…
Even worse, NC passed a law that allows magistrates to refuse to marry a couple if it goes against their “sincerely held religious belief”. Here we go again… I imagine this will be shot down quickly but I’m glad I don’t watch TV news or it would probably drive me crazy for months!
@3bm103 actually, unanimous decisions are pretty common… just not in high-profile cases.
A few other ones I know of off the top of my head are United States v. O’Brien (draft card burning as free speech), Epperson v. Arkansas (overturned Arkansas’ prohibition of teaching evolution), and Engel v. Vitale (school paryer). These are all from the 60s (I am currently collecting info for a class on the 60s… I don’t randomly have these facts normally lol).
