US Supreme Court to hear Arguments on DOMA and Pro

[phkrause]

http://religiousliberty.tv/us-supreme-court-to-hear-arguments-on-doma-and-prop-8-on-march-26.html

[Gregory Matthews]

These two cases are extremely interesting, in my opinion. I agree with the law professor who stated that they have the potential to have the greatest effect on U.S. life that any case has had in many years.

I find it interesting that now that the cases have been heard, some think that DOMA will be thrown out but same-sex unions may not be mandated.

All I all, I find it very interesting.

What if same-sex unions are mandated, but for five different reasons?

[olger]

There is huge moral pressure being brought to bear on Christians, to normalize deviancy. Legal pressure will continue to mount. Some will cave, some will resist, some will join the ranks of the enemy. We must exercise a wise, loving, courageous warfare by which we tear down the strongholds of the enemy (2 Cor. 10:4-5).

[Tom Wetmore]

I am not sure that the issue is about whether same sex marriage can be mandated so much as whether only opposite sex marriage can be permitted, or alternatively, whether same sex marriage can be prohibited. If an action is mandated[/] that would mean everyone in the described class is required to do it, or under the alternative of prohibition, that all in the described class are prohibited from taking the described action.

Since for many Christians this is only a moral issue (rather than also a civil matter), consider how this could play out in terms of other moral or Christian values issues. Let's bring it right home to that which is near and dear to our hearts as Adventists. Consider our reaction if both of these cases were about Sabbath worship rights rather than gay rights. Let's say then that in California that worship on Saturday, Friday or any other day, having been permitted became outlawed and that only only Sunday worship permitted. And consider the impact of the companion case if it was the Federal law called the Defense of Sunday Worship Act. How would that be any different?

[Gregory Matthews]

Always happey to have an attorney and attorney Tom make a comment.

When I used the term "mandated" I used it from the standpoint of the Court issuing a ruling that would require all of the States too allow same sex unions/marriages.

From my perspective, some of the aspects of this issue involve civil rights.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

Consider our reaction if both of these cases were about Sabbath worship rights rather than gay rights.

I think SDA's and others are going to be faced with some real hard question. Do they want the courts of this country to legislate on issues they see as affecting others, considering it a moral issue that needs addressing for the well being of the whole country or do they want the courts to protect all persons moral rights. The question to me is how some define 'morality' and how broad or narrow it will be defined.

[CoAspen]

I want to live in a country where all peoples rights are protected, not just those I agree with. Our country is peopled with a large variety of customs, cultures, spiritual beliefs, etc which make it difficult at times for courts to decide what is best for the country as whole.

[doug yowell]

I want to live in a country where all peoples rights are protected, not just those I agree with. Our country is peopled with a large variety of customs, cultures, spiritual beliefs, etc which make it difficult at times for courts to decide what is best for the country as whole.

ANd what about the right of every culture to determine what kind of sexual relationship they will recognize as a marriage? Where does the right of a 1% sexual deviancy from the norm get the "right" to define for the majority what is and isn't to be recognized as marriage? What historical legal evidence will the USSC need to base their verdict on? Why not apply this same rationale to polygamy and various other sexual practices? Heterosexual marriage has been proven to be a positive custom for every historical culture since the history of the world was written. WHy the need, in the face of worldwide religious, and cultural opposition,to suddenly discover that something that has never been tried before will be best for tomorrow's world?

[CoAspen]

You are ignoring all the stats of the public who do not support your view. Several polls have been run showing the the percentage of those against are decreasing.

Whose moral values do you want the .gov to enforce?

Christianity that loses the word Christ from its designation is the one that choose to have its beliefs enforced rather than living the life of Christ so that others may observe a better way of life.

What are you afraid of, is your God not strong enough??

[BobRyan]

http://religiousliberty.tv/us-supreme-court-to-hear-arguments-on-doma-and-prop-8-on-march-26.html

Lev 18 becomes that much more significant to America.

[BobRyan]

I want to live in a country where all peoples rights are protected, not just those I agree with.

Same here.

The polygamists, practicing homosexuals, pornographers, prostitutes, the abortionists, the drug dealers who only sell to those who consent to having drugs - etc all of them have basic human rights that should be protected.

I think we can all agree on that much.

in Christ,

Bob

[BobRyan]

Originally Posted By: pkrause

http://religiousliberty.tv/us-supreme-court-to-hear-arguments-on-doma-and-prop-8-on-march-26.html

Lev 18 becomes that much more significant to America.

BTW - I am very happy to see our RL department actually figuring this one out in a way that is consistent with the SDA church of the late 1800's.

in Christ,

Bob

[JoeMo]

Quote:

Whose moral values do you want the .gov to enforce?

What are you afraid of, is your God not strong enough??

Excellent points, CA. As soon as we as Christians (not just SDA's) delegate our mission of spreading the Kingdom of God (whatever that means to different people) to the government, we are facilitiating the union of church and state, which - IMO - is facilitating the establishment of the Beast power.

It is deriliction of our Christian duty and disobedience to the command Jesus gave us as Christians - not the government - to "go forth and make disciples..." If we are against same-sex unions, our personal moral obligation is not abstain from entering into them - not by force of law preventing others to do so.

IMO, DOMA and Prop 8 should have never seen the light of day, much less been reviewed by the Supreme Court, unless the question has to do with the legitimate union of two seperate taxable entities into a single taxable entity; and leave the Judeo-Christian moral implications out of it.

[debbym]

Quote:

There is huge moral pressure being brought to bear on Christians, to normalize deviancy. Legal pressure will continue to mount.

we take the enemies ground when we witness and bring people to Christ, not when we fight gay marriage laws. We plunder the stronghold of the enemy when we minister the love of Christ and restore faith in God.

i do not see that Christians are being asked to normalize anything. It has been around for thousands of years. it is nothing new. In the 30's and 40's people just took note and went on about their business. It was good to know if someone was gay inclined, so you know if you are hetero you may not want to become involved, and let yourself in for sorrow.

I see that activist gays are asking for their unions to be recognized legally. it is a civil rights issue defined by the minority affected. i think it is an error to call the union marriage. but that is a semantic issue.

i do not see it affecting anyone but those directly having an interest in this law.

i have the thought let them have it and let it disappear from the media.

in a way i don't think it changes anyone's behaviors. those who want it do it, those who are repulsed by it don't.

i don't think gay marriage laws are going to make anyone gay.

i don't like lots of things people do, like making out in public, drinking alcohol, smoking cigarettes. i Just don't focus my life on it. It is not against the law for people to do lots of things that are not the ideal of God for us.

i hope many gay people will turn to Christ as the end time events unfold, and join everyone's churches.

[ClubV12]

Debbym says,

"we take the enemies ground when we witness and bring people to Christ, not when we fight gay marriage laws."

That is a solid principle as it concerns witnessing. We are counseled not to tear down others beliefs or argue with them (you know, like what happens around here on rare occasion).

So what DO we do? Present the truth, thats what we do, just present the truth. The angels working with the Holy Spirit will take it from there.

On the OTHER HAND, we are also counseled that it's OK (even necessary) to be involved in areas of moral issues. A bar applying for a permit near your house? You may have an OBLIGATION to become actively involved to resist that! How you carry that out I'll leave to the individual. Gay lifestyle issues are certainly one of moral concern. I see Sister Whites counsel as leaving plenty of room to be involved, even politically involved, in the process. I have no counsel how anyone should do that.

Sister White was involved with helping the slaves, which was illegal, she broke the law! How? It's not the kind of thing you write down and talk about, but the weight of evidence is clear, she was very much involved! She was involved on many different "moral issues" that would impact society.

Now find that delicate balance between DON'T tear down, don't argue, preach the truth and get involved politically if need be. Bear in mind, our PRIMARY work as Seventh-day Adventists is to preach the third angels message, that always comes first and foremost.

[BobRyan]

The test of that theory is what Ellen White and the rest of the SDA denomination did "in real life" when confronted with prohibition amendment to the constitution and slavery.

A lot of vocal promoting of Christian values and getting the state to follow the line that the Christian view outlined -

That is a real wake-up call for some of the old guard in the RL department.

I am just glad the guys that are in there now - know enough to oppose the gay marriage agenda.

in Christ,

Bob