The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision creating
“same-sex marriage” has resulted in conflicts in local communities, lawsuits
and the resignation of clerks who claim it violates their religious rights.
Now, among the strategies to protect First
Amendment rights are two proposed voter initiatives in Colorado. One would
preserve the traditional definition of marriage by recognizing it as a
“religious expression.” The other would require the state to establish a list
of businesses willing to accommodate same-sex couples.
The proposals, filed by
Littleton residents Gene Straub and D’Arcy Straub, a lawyer, each will need
98,000 signatures to be placed on the election ballot, the
Denver Post reported.
The proposed constitutional amendment reads: “A
marriage is recognized as a form of religious expression of the people of
Colorado that shall not be abridged through the state prescribing or
recognizing any law that implicitly or explicitly defines a marriage in
opposition or agreement with any particular religious belief.”
The Post explained that any same-sex couple
“married before the proposed amendment takes effect or in another state would
have their relationship redefined as a civil union, which carries some but not
all of the legal rights of marriage.”
The second initiative would require the state to
maintain a list “of businesses willing to provide services to LGBT couples, so
that those opposed could contract with them.”
The proposal is designed
to protect business owners like the
Oregon couple fined $135,000 for declining to make a cake for a lesbian wedding.
WND has compiled a
list of cases in which Christian business owners have been targeted legally or
otherwise because of their stance on marriage.
As
WND reported, legal defenders of
traditional marriage have warned that the Supreme Court ruling creates a
conflict between the newly created right and the First Amendment’s protection
of religious liberty.
Among
other consequences of the ruling, clerks have been forced to quit, judges have stopped issuing
marriage licenses altogether and one U.S. senator said the decision should be
ignored, comparing it to the Dred Scott ruling in which the U.S. Supreme Court
formally declared blacks were inferior to whites.
And, notably, Christian leaders representing
tens of millions of constituents have told the Supreme Court they will not
abide by the decision.
‘Radically redefine’
The Post reported the Straubs are scheduled to
meet July 16 with the Colorado Legislative Council staff to talk about the
language of the proposals.
Among the opponents is “gay” activist Dave
Montez, who called it “an unnecessary attempt to radically redefine all
marriages in Colorado in order to undermine the Supreme Court’s recent
decision.”
“Even before last week’s Supreme Court decision,
the 37 states that already had marriage equality had proven that when loving,
committed, gay couples share in the freedom to marry, families are helped and
no one is hurt,” he said, according to the Post.
In fact, the vast majority of those 37 states
have had “gay marriage” imposed on them by federal judges, mostly against the
wishes of the voters.
Another opponent of the proposed initiatives is
state Rep. Dominick Moreno, a member of the Colorado House Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual and Transgender Caucus.
“You can’t override the Supreme Court,
especially at the state level,” he said, the paper reported.
‘Ignore it’
WND
reported it was Sen. Ted Cruz,
R-Texas, a candidate for the GOP nomination for president, who told NPR
that there are many across America who can just ignore the Supreme Court
ruling.
He said the case was brought by parties from
four states, but that “does not mean that those who are not parties to a case
are bound by a judicial order.”
Cruz said it’s tragic that the Supreme Court
justices decided to rewrite the Constitution instead of doing their job, which
is to interpret the law.
“It is a sad moment for the court when you have
judges seizing authority that does not belong to them,” he said.
One change that would help, Cruz believes, is to
put justices on the election ballot periodically for retention or removal by
voters.
“If judges overstep their bounds, violate the
Constitution, then the people have a check to remove them of office. I’ve
called for that change,” he said.
Another Republican presidential candidate,
former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, said, if elected, he would sign executive
orders to protect businesses, churches and others from the “discrimination,
intimidation, or civil or criminal penalties” expected for exercising their
religious beliefs.
He said the attorney general also could
prosecute violations of First Amendment rights.
“While some cowardly politicians wave the white
flag and surrender to this unconstitutional, out-of-control act of judicial
tyranny, I reject this decision and will fight from ‘Day One’ of my
administration to defend our Constitution and protect religious liberty,” he
said.
“This ruling by the five
lawyers is no law at all,” said Mat Staver, chairman of Liberty Counsel, a prominent legal defender of biblical marriage. “It is lawless
and must be treated as such.”
At
Conservative Review, Senior Editor Daniel
Horowitz said the Supreme Court has threatened the nation’s foundational
principle.
“We have seen the court redefine statutes. We
have seen the court redefine the Constitution like they did with Obamacare and
in Roe v. Wade. But now we witness the court go a step further and void out
natural law, the very foundation on which the Declaration of Independence was
constructed – the document that asserts fundamental rights and liberties.”
The decision, he said, was based on
“indefensible” assertions and “is not just immoral.”
“It is irrational and illegal,” he said of the
majority opinion written by Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Related stories:
Related columns:
How
marriage defenders lost their case, Part 1 by Fr. Marcel Guarnizo
The
outrageous dissolution of marriage by Joseph Farah
Source:http://www.wnd.com/2015/07/pushback-voters-now-look-to-redefine-gay-marriage/
No comments:
Post a Comment