The SUPREME Court - The Bigger Picture - Welcome to Totalitarianism

It has been an eventful week. First the Supreme Court upheld Obamacare. The same justice Roberts who earlier defied the argument of the measures supporters that the mandate did not amount to a tax and essentially rewrote the statute to make it a tax in order to uphold it (yes, it was that bad), was at it again.

This time, in spite of almost irrefutable evidence and plain logic based on the words of the law indicating that the Obamacare subsidies were to be provided by individual states, not the Federal Government, Justice Roberts found a way to stretch the meaning of "State" to include a nebulous "intent" that went beyond the wording, thus making the law valid. This massive usurpation of legislative authority relied on feeling over law and a basic denial that words have meaning at all, as Justice Scalia pointed out in a scathing dissent.

Then the Supremes ruled on same-sex marriage. Again the linguistic gymnastics required to manufacture a desired outcome was something the Court found a way to justify. Justice Scalia excoriated the line " "The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity."

What exactly does it mean, as a legal matter, to "define and express (one's) identity?" What are the limits on this right now that gender in society is defined entirely by one's "feelings"?

Jim Wallis Supports Same Sex Marriage - Why I am Not Surprised

Headline at Christian Post "Jim Wallis Now Supports Same-Sex Marriage".

First of all, no surprise here.  Anyone who has read the Sojourners site at all could see how the social justice bent of the overall ethos there and the progressive theological influences would make this a logical step.  Add the overwhelming support for same sex unions from those who comment there and the criticism Wallis faced from the left for not doing this sooner...let's just say I'm not in the least surprised.

What interests me is the reasoning and the approach Wallis takes.  He begins by talking about the overall decline in marriage in the culture at large.

"We are losing marriage in this society. I'm worried about that – among low income people, but all people. How do we commit liberals and conservatives to re-covenanting marriage, reestablishing, renewing marriage?"

Now that sounds like something conservatives and liberals could agree on, right?  (More)

Reverse discrimination

There appears to be growing evidence that the advancement of gay rights, particularly gay marriage, does cause discrimination against people of faith.  So "no bullying" leads to bullying.

In one case a Portland couple is under investigation for declining to fashion a wedding cake for a lesbian couple

There are similar cases in the UK, one involving a marriage counselor who felt giving marriage advice to gay couples violated her faith.

While the secular society claims there can be no absolutes, it is clear full acceptance of gay inclusion is a secular absolute that is increasingly enforced with public accusations of irrational bigotry and now the threat of legal ramifications. So the force of law, the courts and eventually the police will almost certainly be used to make sure everyone complies with the new sexual ethic.

News Flash: Legalized Gay Marriage Harms Society

One common argument made by proponets of gay marriage is the emotional appeal that no one will be hurt by legalized same-sex marriage and that those heterosexuals who wish to honor their marriages can still do so.  Apparently, in the UK, the argument has even been made that by opening up an official status of "married" to gay couples, marriage as an institution will be strengthened.   

That kind of argument has been forcefully answered by Dr. Patricia Morgan in her testimony before the House of Commons.  She argues, and support her view with statistics, that gay marriage will further erode the cultural commitment to the institution of marriage, and in fact, by decoupling marriage from the procreation and nurture of children, it will in fact harm society.

Her testimony is summarized at the Telegraph.
(More)

Trust Your Feelings - Steve Chalke on Inclusion

This  issue will not go away because the gay rights advocates will not let it.

Prominent British Evangelical Steve Chalke has come out in support of gay inclusion.  Of course this follows a predictable trajectory that has been documented on this blog for a number of years, not only in my short-lived experiment with Anglicanism, but also in the steady drift to the theological left of figures such as Brian McLaren and Tony Jones.  More

Children of "Unstable" Marriages

Ed Whelan of NRO has a three part article about the recent study of children of various alternative forms of marriage published by the academic journal Social Science Research.  The study has caused a fair amount of buzz on the web with opponents of gay marriage quoting it and supporters of gay marriage trashing it.  Interesting that there is a secondary conclusion that is suggested by the study.  (More)

There Aren't That Many of Us

David French blogs at Patheos under the blog name The French Revolution.  He recently wrote An Open Letter to Young, “Post-Partisan” Evangelicals.

In the article he describes his own journey of rebellion, young idealistic political views that focused on justice and the poor and eschewed the culture wars - until gradually he came to a place where he became a full fledged conservative.  It is worth a read.  A couple of highlights:  (More)

The Pragmatic Case

It usually does little good to argue about same-sex marriage as a public policy issue using Biblical  arguments, no matter how badly we wish to rebut some of the horrific exegesis that comes from progressive Christians who support this massive and unprecedented subversion of 3400 years of western civilization.

A case must be made that shows how changing the definition of marriage changes society at large in a negative way and why a government should care.  Here are a few thoughts.   (Read More)

Marriage - The Definition is the Issue

I’ll take a stab at the hot button topic of the day.  

Why is it that conservative Christians are opposed to gay marriage in this enlightened post-modern age?

Let me begin by saying it is not that Conservative Christians are opposed to “love”.  I don’t think there is anything anyone would say against two people of the same gender having a certain affection for each other.  It is true that affections can sometimes be unhealthy – even simple friendships and heterosexual romances.  Still the issue isn’t “love” as in a “feeling” two people have for each other.

Christianity is a faith that exalts a set of high moral standards and then tells us that none of us can keep those standards.  It responds to this dilemma with grace – a deep, deep well of forgiveness.  The result is that the moral law of God which none of us keep perfectly ceases to be a source of condemnation, but remains a goal.  We are not always honest, but we strive for honesty.  We are not always faithful, but we strive for fidelity.   The moral standards affirmed in both the Old and New Testament are not a means of salvation but they remain ideals by which we examine ourselves and seek to be better people.  So – the issue is “what are our ideals?” (Read more)