Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Christian Leaders Claim Supreme Court 'Has No Authority to Redefine Marriage'

Posted by   + Show Post

Christian Leaders Claim Supreme Court 'Has No Authority to Redefine Marriage'

article image

Many well-known Christians have signed the "Marriage Solidarity Statement," which claims the U.S. Supreme Court does not have the right to redefine marriage.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court did redefine marriage in 1967, Loving v. Virginia, when it legalized interracial marriage.

The conservative signers of the defiant document include Dr. James Dobson, Rev. Franklin Graham and Dr. Ben Carson.

The statement says in part:

If the Supreme Court becomes the tool by which marriage is redefined in the positive law of this nation, the precedent established will leave no room for any limitation on what can constitute such a redefined notion of marriage. Conferring a moral and legal equivalency to same-sex couples by legislative or judicial fiat also sends the message that children do not need a mother and a father. It undermines their fundamental rights and threatens their security, stability and future.

Finally, the Supreme Court has no authority to redefine marriage and thereby weaken both the family and society. Unlike the Legislative Branch that has the power of the purse and the Executive Branch which has the figurative power of the sword, the Judicial Branch has neither. It must depend upon the Executive Branch for the enforcement of its decisions.

As Christians united together in defense of marriage, we pray that this will not happen. But, make no mistake about our resolve.

The Liberty Counsel's Mat Staver, who helped write the statement, told "We say unequivocally that if the Supreme Court were to issue a decision that redefined marriage or set the foundation to redefine marriage, that decision would be an illegitimate decision. If the Supreme Court or any other civil institution seeks to redefine marriage into something it cannot be, this is a line that we cannot and will not cross. And we may be facing a clash of unprecedented proportions, but we cannot idly stand by."


by on Jun. 25, 2013 at 8:59 AM
Replies (441-443):
by Bronze Member on Jun. 27, 2013 at 9:21 PM

You need to provide your own research to back up your comments. 

Quoting jcribb16:

No, I'm not.  And since you nixed doing some research on my other comments you questioned me on, per your previous remark, our conversation is done, wrapped up, over, through, finished, exhausted, ended, concluded, and terminated.


Quoting stacymomof2:

Are you saying public school is the same as a church? Lol.

Quoting jcribb16:

Oh I'm comprehending the issue.  I'm not sure how much you read of the previous responses that led up to this one of mine, but I was merely giving examples of how the government has overstepped their boundaries into the "church" - "separation of church and state" that many people keep accusing Christians of overstepping.  

The church is not just simply the "church," per se, but includes anything religious, including the fact that schools in the beginning of the foundation of America, definitely included prayer, the Bible, and the teachings of God's values and principles.  


Quoting stacymomof2:

Absolutely ridiculous. These comments don't even make sense. What does public school have to do with church? Im not even sure you comprehending the actual issue.

Quoting jcribb16:

Yes, it would be illegal.  However, this is more than possible and churches are being pressured behind the scenes.  There are churches, even as of now, who have attorneys going back through the Bylaws of the Church Constitution, making sure of the wording, and protection, from the gov't slowly but steadily trying to impose certain restrictions on them if they don't agree to what they want, including this very subject.

Birth control is a hot issue, already trampled on with the Catholic Church, and other churches who believe the same. No one ever thought the government would intrude with something like that.  

No one ever thought the government would step into the schools when this country was founded and set up, by providing supplies, and therefore giving themselves the right to then step in and ultimately remove the Christian morals, principles, and behavior, based on Godly principles, and then eventually remove using the Bible for memorization, and study, and then removing Creation instead of both Creation and Evolution being included for thoughts and views.  Etc., etc., etc.  So yes, it is more than possible, has happened, and will keep happening.

Quoting stacymomof2:

oh bullshit.  How would that even be possible?  Are you really saying that curches will be required to perform marriages they dont agree with?  That is not true at all, furthermore it would be blatantly illegal.

Quoting jcribb16:

Trying to force the church is coming.  That's one reason the churches have Constitutional Bylaws in place, for having a leg to stand on when the government keeps trying to step over the line of separation of church and state.

Quoting stacymomof2:

So what is your actual argument here? That no one except Christians can use the term marriage? Ridiculous. Marriage is a legal contract. It is called marriage. No one is forcing any church to perform a marriage they refuse to recognize. Your argument stems from wanting to restrict others rights. The scotus does havw the authority to define marriage. That's their whole thing.

Quoting yourspecialkid:


Quoting stacymomof2:

That is what is happening now. I don't understand why you are saying it isn't. Legal same swx marriage will not prevent a church from not recognizing it. You can get married in a church but the state doesn't recognize the legality of it until you get your paper. On the flip side some churches currently di not recognize some legal marriages.

What did I miss about your argument?

Quoting yourspecialkid:


Quoting IhartU:

Quoting yourspecialkid:

 IMHO, the 1967 ruling did not redefine marriage as it was still between one man and one woman.

I think all of this could be solved if the government just got out of the marriage business altogether.


How would they do that? Government and Law go hand and hand.

How about religions get out of the marriage business altogether instead? After all, they didn't invent it, don't own it and have no right to tell anyone they can't marry.

 Thinking outside the box helps. 

You are not going to get the truly religious to endorse sin.  It just isn't going to happen.  Marriage is a holy sacrament and has been for centuries.  You don't just tell people to stuff their traditions.

You can however find a solution for everyone.

I don't know a singe very religious person that objects to rights that are being sought.  Those seeking rights should not object to a religous persons belief that marrage is holy.

The only thing preventing a reasonable solution is the government.  You might want to ask yourself why.  But, that is a whole other discussion.

The military is going to start allowing some benefits for those that have signed a Declaration of Partnership.  Why not extend this to all partnerships?  Everyone goes down to the courhouse, clerk...wherever and gets this legal paperwork.  What they do next in terms of a ceremony or celebration is on them and whoever will perform it for them.  Ta da...solution for everyone.  Well, everyone except those that are more interested in legislated acceptance than they are of rights.


 The system for ssm we have now basically gives no protections to the religious..particularly the clergy.

For some of you it is semantics...and all about the word marriage.  That is fine if you feel that way, but for a lot of us marriage is a is holy.  Defiling it is akin to the burning of a holy book.  Nothing will change the way we feel about this.  We can not be legislated into the acceptance of sin.

A way to rights...and the preservation of a sacrament is a Declaration of Partnership for everyone.  You go down to the court/clerk..sign it pay your fee and the deal is sealed.  Anything you do after that is up to you.

by Bronze Member on Jun. 27, 2013 at 9:48 PM
1 mom liked this

funny how marriage was a legal binding contract long before holy matrimony came around.

by Ruby Member on Jun. 28, 2013 at 9:42 AM
1 mom liked this

Do you have any examples of this correspondence?  From what I can see regarding churches and their beliefs and practices regarding homosexuality, there is a wide array of beliefs and practices, and they have all gone or are going through the church hierarchy in regards to any changes that might be made.  Same with abortion and contraception.  The government hasn't interferred in these issues within any church.   Nor are they interferring in religious education.  Unless you can cite some specific examples, I don't think you've made much of a case for the government attempting to force religions to change their beliefs and practices.

Quoting jcribb16:

As I've already mentioned earlier, there has been correspondence sent to some fundamental and conservative churches.  Which is why many of them are having to have their attorneys go back through the churches' Constitutional Bylaws, to re-check the wording, update information, and be very specific in what they say about all of these hot issues happening - such as bc, abortion, homosexuality, transgendering and surgeries to change genders, Christian education and private Christian schools, indemnification, the subject of home, church, state, and government, and much more.  

It may sound petty to some, but the church takes this seriously.  

Quoting PamR:

Can anyone cite a specific example of how churches are being pressured to allow same-sex marriage if it goes against their denomination's beliefs?

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)