In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court has struck down Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (D.O.M.A.) on Wednesday, which basically means that the federal government must recognize same-sex marriages in states that redefine marriage.
According to the Heritage Foundation, “Right now, twelve states can now force the federal government to recognize their definition of marriage.”
The 38 states with laws defining marriage as the “union of a man and a woman” remain the same as prior to the Supreme Court ruling.
What is actually troubling is the Supreme Court’s ruling on Prop 8 (the provision, Section 7.5 of the Declaration of Rights to the California Constitution, which provides that: “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California”), paving the way to same-sex marriages in California, and completely ignoring the citizens of California who voted twice to pass Prop 8.
Needless to say, there was much jubilation and celebration among same-sex marriage supporters on the Supreme Court steps Wednesday, right after the announcement of the historic rulings.
In a CNN interview, Molly Wagoner stated, “I’m just so happy, just overrun with emotion. I couldn’t be more proud of my country and the Supreme Court today.”
Many same-sex marriage advocates were crying, cheering and already planning their weddings.
Many smaller-government Conservatives also embraced the Supreme Court’s decision. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., told ABC News, “The Supreme Court ruling on the Defense of Marriage Act was appropriate, and that the issue should be left to the states.”
Polygamy activists weren’t shy about expressing their hopes that the Supreme Court’s landmark rulings on gay marriage could also lead to a breakthrough for their own cause.
According to the Daily Mail report, “Some polygamists predict that the decisions will ‘blaze the marriage equality trail’, saying that ‘the nuclear family is not the majority any more’.” The Daily Mail also explained, “During the ongoing debate over gay marriage in the past few years, the topic of polygamy has often been raised by critics who claim that extending marriage to homosexuals will eventually result in marriages involving multiple people.”
Of course, the Supreme Court decisions were also met with great despair and strong resistance. In fact, Former Republican Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee had these strong words to say about Wednesday’s SCOTUS rulings:
“My immediate thoughts on the SCOTUS ruling that determined that same sex marriage is okay: “Jesus wept.” Five people in robes said they are bigger than the voters of California and Congress combined. And bigger than God. May He forgive us all.”
The Supreme Court justices were also strongly divided in their decisions. Regarding D.O.M.A., Justice Anthony Kenny wrote that the law “places same-sex couples in an unstable position of being in a second-tier marriage…The differentiation demeans the couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects, and whose relationship the state has sought to dignify.”
On the other hand, Justice Scalia delivered a fiery dissent to the Supreme Court’s decision. National Journal reported, “Scalia says that Justice Anthony Kennedy and his colleagues in the majority have resorted to calling opponents of gay marriage “enemies of the human race.”
Justice Scalia charged in his dissent:
“But to defend traditional marriage is not to condemn, demean, or humiliate those who would prefer other arrangements, any more than to defend the Constitution of the United States is to con- demn, demean, or humiliate other constitutions. To hurl such accusations so casually demeans this institution. In the majority’s judgment, any resistance to its holding is beyond the pale of reasoned disagreement. To question its high-handed invalidation of a presumptively valid statute is to act (the majority is sure) with the purpose to “dis- parage,” “injure,” “degrade,” “demean,” and “humiliate” our fellow human beings, our fellow citizens, who are homo- sexual. All that, simply for supporting an Act that did no more than codify an aspect of marriage that had been unquestioned in our society for most of its existence— indeed, had been unquestioned in virtually all societies for virtually all of human history. It is one thing for a society to elect change; it is another for a court of law to impose change by adjudging those who oppose it hostes humani generis, enemies of the human race.”
Justice Scalia then warned, “I promise you this: The only thing that will “confine” the Court’s holding is its sense of what it can get away with.”
The Supreme Court decisions were certainly met with strong reaction from many leaders in the Christian Community. Cardinal Timothy Dolan, head of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), referred to Wednesday’s decisions as
“A tragic day for marriage and our nation.”
Cardinal Dolan blasted the Supreme Court saying, “The Court got it wrong. The federal government ought to respect the truth that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, even where states fail to do so. The preservation of liberty and justice requires that all laws, federal and state, respect the truth, including the truth about marriage.”
In fact, many Christians immediately stood up to defend the Biblical definition of marriage. Tina Graham Anderson included in her weekly column:
“I love God. I love His Word. I love people. There are some people I particularly love who disagree with me on this issue. But to me, it is clear. If America was ever a Christian nation, it is moving away from that idea. The U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling against the Defense of Marriage Act proves that. Even so, I am a Christian, and I believe Scripture, not just some verses, but the whole of it. I even believe the Bible when it gives me directions and admonitions I don’t like.”
While Christians have been standing up for traditional marriage, enduring the mockery and fierce character assassinations, a Lesbian activist, Masha Gessen, openly admitted that gay marriage isn’t even about equality at all, but about destroying marriage altogether.
Gessen recently made these comments in Australia:
“It’s a no-brainer that (homosexual activists) should have the right to marry, but I also think equally that it’s a no-brainer that the institution of marriage should not exist. …(F)ighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there — because we lie that the institution of marriage is not going to change, and that is a lie.”
Many representatives on both sides of the aisle also chose to respond to Wednesday’s Supreme Court decisions. Congresswoman Michele Bachmann said, “No man, not even a Supreme Court, can undo what a holy God has instituted. For thousands of years of recorded human history, no society has defended the legal standard of marriage as anything other than between man and woman.”
According to the Daily Caller, Kansas Republican Rep. Tim Huelskamp also responded to the SCOTUS’s decisions by announcing plans to introduce a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution. He announced:
“This radical usurpation of legislative and popular authority will not end the debate over marriage in this country. Congress clearly must respond to these bad decisions, and as a result, I plan to introduce the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA) to amend the United States Constitution to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.”
Former President Bill Clinton praised the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down D.O.M.A…(even though he is the president who actually signed D.O.M.A. into law). The Clinton’s stated:
“By overturning the Defense of Marriage Act, the Court recognized that discrimination towards any group holds us all back in our efforts to form a more perfect union. We are also encouraged that marriage equality may soon return to California. We applaud the hard work of the advocates who have fought so relentlessly for this day, and congratulate Edie Windsor on her historic victory.”
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also called the ruling striking down the Defense of Marriage Act “a great, historic day for equality in America. Reid said, “The idea that allowing two loving, committed people to marry would have a negative impact on anyone else, or on our nation as a whole, has always struck me as absurd.”
Those are pretty powerful words coming from a guy who also voted for D.O.M.A.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie held nothing back when he slammed the Supreme Court decision on DOMA as “wrong” and an example of “judicial supremacy.”
In fact, the Supreme Court decisions have opened a whole new “can of worms,” so to speak, as so many Americans now have many more questions and concerns than answers and resolve. Here are three major concerns we are certain to visit in the very near future:
1. Religious institutions being forced to violate their conscience to marry same-sex couples. Even though President Obama has already stated that he wouldn’t try to force religious institutions to conduct gay marriages, churches are beginning to voice concerns that the IRS could revoke their non-profit status if they refuse to marry same-sex couples.
In fact, Breitbart just reported: “The DOMA decision makes clear that marriage is a state-to-state issue, meaning that religious institutions that receive non-profit status on the federal level but do not perform or accept same-sex marriages in states where it is legal could have non-profit status revoked. Furthermore, should the IRS move to revoke federal non-profit status for churches, synagogues and mosques that do not perform same-sex marriage more generally, the Court could easily justify that decision on the basis of “eradicating discrimination” in religious education.”
2. Where will we draw the line on “love”? Many Americans are now left wondering where our nation will draw the line with its new, liberating “love is love” mantra. Will it also open the doors for polygamy, pedophilia, and bestiality in the future?
3. Will there be discrimination against Bible-believing Christians? Many Americans are also wondering what will happen to those who still choose to openly oppose gay marriage. Will they soon not be able to get jobs, get into colleges, etc., if they outwardly disagree when their state decides to redefine marriage? Will they be isolated and targeted as “bigots” and “haters” for simply embracing Biblical Scripture? Will the Supreme Court’s decisions ultimately bring their First Amendment right to its end?
The Supreme Court make have spoken on Wednesday. But we can most certainly bet that this marriage debate is FAR from over, as we are sure to see in upcoming days.