June 26, 2015

How the Supreme Court’s decision for gay marriage could affect religious institutions

Sexual Orientation and Discrimination Laws

Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions. It has been a question on the minds of the justices, too.

Indeed, during the April 28 oral arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges, most of the justices asked about or commented on this issue. Justice Samuel Alito drew a possible parallel with Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution that lost its nonprofit, tax-exempt status in 1983 as a result of its policy banning interracial marriage and dating.

If the court ruled in favor of gay marriage, “would the same apply to a university or college if it opposed same-sex marriage?” Alito had asked Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, who was arguing on behalf of the government in favor of gay marriage. “It is going to be an issue,” Verrilli answered.

Virtually everyone agrees that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution offers some protections for religious groups. For example, most (even among gay rights advocates) believe the Constitution protects clergy from being required to officiate at marriages for same-sex couples and churches from being forced to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry in their sanctuaries.

But what about a church basement or retreat center, which is rented out for opposite-sex weddings? And what about a religiously affiliated institution, like a university, that offers married heterosexual students housing but refuses such accommodation for married gay and lesbian students?

These questions have real-world implications, since virtually all American religious groups have affiliated nonprofits (such as schools, hospitals and charities). And many, including some evangelical Protestant denominations, the Catholic Church, the Mormon church and Orthodox Jewish groups, oppose gay marriage on religious grounds.

Some scholars believe that the ruling in favor of gay marriage will not lead to widespread acrimony and legal battles. They note, for example, that there is no federal law banning discrimination based on sexual orientation. And, of the 22 states that ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, a majority (13) have at least some protections for religious groups written into their anti-discrimination statutes.

“There’s a big difference between something that could be an issue and something that’s likely to be an issue,” says Robert Tuttle, who teaches religion and law at George Washington University. Tuttle says he believes there may be some lawsuits, but he predicts that in more cases than not, accommodation and compromise are likely to win out. “After all, we still allow institutions, like universities, to discriminate based on gender,” he says.

But University of Illinois law professor Robin Fretwell Wilson says it’s possible that institutions will be pressured to give ground on gay marriage by federal authorities (such as the Internal Revenue Service, which could take away an institution’s tax-exempt status), state civil rights commissions or private lawsuits. She notes, for example, that the federal government now reads its laws against sex discrimination “to include sexual orientation discrimination, which opens a whole layer of potential threat” to religious organizations.

And yet she also says it is possible that all sides will “be able to live in peace,” noting a recent compromise in Utah, “where you saw an extension of gay rights in exchange for religious protections.”

Note: This is an update of a post published on June 25, 2015.

Related: Timeline: Same-sex marriage, state by state

Gay marriage around the world

5 facts about same-sex marriage 

Topics: Religion and Government, Supreme Court, Religion and U.S. Politics, Gay Marriage and Homosexuality

  1. Photo of David Masci

    is a senior writer/editor focusing on religion at Pew Research Center.


  1. Bill S1 year ago

    Cousin couples (male female) can’t marry in my state but 2 guys can, and do..

  2. JJ truth1 year ago

    Nothing but lies. Sodomy promoted as marriage against all religious law is definitely aimed at destroying the church. Clearly the liberal radicals want an all out religious. I keep reading in articles that the people of all 50 states yelled for, and clamoured to pass gay marriage. The lies have already begun the truth is the Supreme Court and the state supreme courts overturned those laws acting against the will of the people in a majority of states. All of it is open hostility toward the church they’re not fooling anyone. They got away with this much because of all the plastic, phonies inside the church who didn’t offer any pushback because they are unbelieving hypocrites. I suggest these corrupt pastors and church leaders resign and step down. God will probably kill them off to make way for those who will do according to His will. Not all Christians are going meekly to worship evil as do our so-called leaders who offered not a peep of resistance. These frauds never make known to those in govt. the Word of GOD and the consequences their God hating will bring upon this nation and future generations. How dare they talk about repentance when they are too afraid to address the wicked rulers with God’s truth’s? This war will be left to the people to fight.

  3. MUGABI DAVID2 years ago


    from my least understanding man’s decision on how he exercises his rights its indeed ridiculous we’ve chosen to live an independent life completely detached our selves frm GOD.
    Yes its him that gave us the freedom to live our life the way desire but ignoring the fact much as we enjoy the inseparable liberties we’re and till the omega we shall remain GODS CREATION under his supreme authority and judgement.
    TO me its such a disappointment that instead of appreciating the GODLY LOVE AND BLESSINGS UPON THE ABLE INSTEAD UTHE CONTRARY IS WHAT IS BEING DONE.

  4. Carol Eblen2 years ago

    Unfortunately, in the Background of the Gay Marriage Case heard by SCOTUS, the HIV/AIDS and other STD epidemic in the US Armed Services and the civilian population of the USA meant that the FEDERAL Government, the DOD, had ALREADY legalized and normalzed homosexuality, same-sex marriage, and HIV/AIDS for all of the Troops and federal workers in 2013 in order to treat the ongoing epidemic in the Armed Forces and the civilian population.

    How could SCOTUS not support the DOD and the Commander-in-Chief and the 31 Billion Dollar 2016 federal AIDS/HIV program that depends upon the medical treating of HIV/AIDS and the normalization of HIV/AIDS to treat and contain the virus in the Armed Services and the civilian population.

    SCOTUS litigated in violation of the balance of powers but will this monumental change in public policy in the Military and the civilian population contribute to the greatest public good —-even though it means that “sodomy” is legalized in all 50 States under state marriage licenses.

  5. Terrie2 years ago

    If the people of a State have voted down same sex marriage, how can the Supreme Court rule that the States have to allow it? I really don’t understand, I have read the Constitution, Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. Since this country was founded on God and Bible Participles and this goes against what we believe, how can anyone force the States to make this change? Please explain because I really do not understand and since Tennessee is not going to allow it in their state what about the other state? Don’t the people of the USA have a say? I mean this was already voted on and turned down.

    1. BJJ812 years ago

      Constitutional rights cannot be impeded by popular right. If they could, a simple majority could institute tyranny.

      While the constitution does not guarantee the right to marry, it does guarantee the right to equal protection under the law, and the right to due process. Marriage licenses are issued by the state, and therefore denying them only to certain people or marriageable age and not others, is unconstitutional discrimination BY the state.

    2. Anonymous1 year ago

      God will judge America for this Wow i feel for those justices

  6. Carol Eblen2 years ago

    It is not surprising that SCOTUS gave same-sex couples the right to marry under existing state laws in view of the fact that The Department of Defense, the federal government, recognized same-sex marriages for The Armed Forces of the United States last year, in 2014.

    Why didn’t the DOD wait for a ruling from the Court? Wasn’t it obvious that SCOTUS would support the decision of the DOD who was already recognizing same-sex marriages of the troops in those states that allowed these marriages?

    The DOD and other agencies of the federal government have been actively engaged in researching AIDS/HIV to try to stem the spread of AIDS in the Armed Forces, in the civilian community, and in the countries who are military allies of the USA. Billions of US tax dollars are devoted to this effort as a matter of public policy of the USA under both political parties.

    Apparently, the “Don’t Ask –Don’t Tell” policy of the DOD has not been working effectively to contain the incidence of AIDS in the Armed Forces of the United States because the stigmatizing of homosexuality and anal sex still exists and the LGBT troops aren’t voluntarily asking to be tested for AIDS after engaging in unprotected anal sex because of the stigma involved.

    While The Armed Forces test for the AIDS Virus in the physical that is required for enlistment in the Armed Services, and the Armed Services test the troops every two years automatically for the presence of AIDS, they advise that the virus still spreads because millions of HIV/AIDS infected individuals have no idea that they are carrying the virus, and some of these millions are in the Armed Forces of the United States and in the Armed Forces of our allies who then spread it to other troops with whom they have unprotected sex. It is an ongoing problem. But, if AIDS is caught early in its process, it can be contained and treated. Conquering the AIDS Pandemic in the USA and in the World is a matter of National Defense.

    Does the DOD believe that the SCOTUS decision that requires all states to marry same sex couples will result in better control of the AIDS pandemic because homosexuality and anal sex will no longer be stigmatized and discrimination against the LGBT community in and outside of the Armed Services of the United States will decrease over time and contribute to the greater health of all of the citizens of the USA.

    Will homosexuals become more monagamous over time and will this help to end the AIDS pandemic? Will the states again require blood tests that test for the AIDS virus and other venereal diseases when they are required to issue licenses for citizens to marry in their states, including same sex couples of the LGBT Community?

    Will the rights of “Straights” within the Armed Services whose religious views
    render homosexuality offensive to them be protected as well, or will they be forced to be housed with LGBT troops aginst their will and religious convictions?

    In retrospect, will the SCOTUS decision increase homosexuality and bi-sexuality in the population of the United States in the next 20 years but also increase the general health and welfare of the LGBT community as as an innoculated cure for AIDS becomes available?

    1. JJ truth1 year ago

      Because the people of those states foolishly elected governors who appointed radicals to the state supreme courts. Don’t ask don’t tell probably prevented a lot of homosexual rape. Now with Obama passing that filth well troop readiness will be compromised. Don’t even argue with me. C’mon Bradley Manning commits treason abandoning his post giving away troop positions for sex causing a entire platoon to be wiped out. Instead, of dishonorable discharge and the death penalty for committing treason he gets a sex change on the tax payer’s dime, courtesy of that foul, perverse creature pres. Obama. Well the die has been cast and the U.S.A will face the Divine Judgment and Wrath of God. Church leaders didn’t even warn these fools to turn away from their foolish folly and repent. Not one of them made the case for God other than the little people who got expelled from schools, fired, sued and placed in jail. Well Americans will have to face the penalty of allowing these wicked Godless, God hating evil rulers their sway. The false church here in America will be destroyed and persecuted as well. God will turn America over to her enemies as a captive. This is the last and the harshest of the Judgements.

  7. Sydney2 years ago

    There will be terrifying times in the last days people will be self centered and lovers of money,proud,haughty, abusive,disobedient,ungrateful,irreligious,callous,implacable,slanderous,licentious,brutal,hating what is good, traitors, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than God.

    Let’s get this broken world back on track #imachristan

  8. Carolann2 years ago

    It is impossible for The Catholic Church to perform same-sex “marriages”. Our Lord Jesus Christ made marriage a “Sacrament”. No man made law can trump Divine Law. When a Catholic priest marries a couple, he is actually presiding over THE Sacrament Of Marriage in which the man and woman, with Our Lord’s Grace, give to eachother.
    If a same-sex couple wanted to “marry” in the Catholic Church, they Could Not. There would be NO SACRAMENT. It is Our Lord Himself that GIVES The Sacrament, together with a man and woman properly disposed to recieve it. Say for example, if a Catholic couple decide that they would not be open to children, it would disqualify them from recieving The Sacrament Of Marriage, even if they went through the Marriage Rite. Nothing would happen. The marriage would be invalid from the beginning.
    I hope this info helps.

    1. Samantha Covington2 years ago

      In the Bible it does not say that homosexual relationships are condemned for having a purely committed relationship. It says that those who do not fulfill their duties as men are punishable.

    2. Samantha Covington2 years ago

      I do not believe that this is resourceful information, instead it is something that you have believed in and learned from someone ignorant. You must really have seen in God’s heart to know which couple he gives the sacrament to, because if not, in best opinion, it is clear that your spew you uneducated slurs are not needed. Persons like you need to straighten up your path of idiotic thoughts and ideas, because it’s clear you all need to study the original bible. In which came from an era where men of famous publicity were in homosexual relations.

  9. Mike2 years ago

    Why are religious institutions getting tax breaks? Most religious institutions use the vast majority of their funds to pay for the upkeep of property, pay salaries and spread their religion. None of these are worthy of tax exemption. If they are doing social good, feeding the poor, providing help to the needy then open their books and make sure these institutions are meeting the same requirements as other charitable organizations that get tax relief.

    The reality is many are doing nothing but feathering their own nests, and like the Mormon Church, interfering in politics, and so they should have their tax free status removed.
    That would put over 60 billion dollars of deficit relief or social program spending back into he government.

    1. Roman Catholic2 years ago

      Are you telling me that 1.2 billions of Roman Catholics have no right to practice our religion. That our churches should pay taxes, that sounds to me like a propaganda to shut the door of our churches for the luck of founds, and to stop Catholics from freely practicing our religion. Do you think that we Catholics do not know what the money is spent for, we do, but its our money to give to the Church not yours, and the government will not be getting piece of that pie . Let me enlighten you, what the word church means, for you not know what you speak of, church is the make up of all Roman Catholics. So from your post i am assuming that you want us to pay taxes on the money which we gift to ourselves, so we can have a place for our meetings where we can share Gods.

    2. Brandon Ledbetter2 years ago

      How is the Mormon church interfering with politics?

    3. Yo yo yo2 years ago

      Why do we need billions of dollars down the drain on worthless social programs. All it does is make people dependent on Uncle Sam. No thanks, I pay enough for laziness in my taxes now!

    4. Freeda2 years ago

      That is where you are absolutely wrong. Churches do provide services to the poor and needy, as well as classes for those who otherwise could not afford them, scholarships, medical care, etc. Since you likely don’t attend church, you are sorely ill informed. And if you want to look at the majority of the charities in the world that actually support human beings, not animals or non living things, but human beings, the majority of those organizations are Christian. Why you ask? Because Christians live by biblical principles. Worldly people only want to blame God for the evil they themselves produce in the world. Worldly people only want to help non humans with their time and resources. Worldly people only wish to complain about what every one else is not doing while they themselves do absolutely nothing, ever. God Bless You.

    5. Leigh2 years ago

      The people of the congragation give the money to support the church. Our money has already been taxed. Why should we be double taxed just because people don’t understand the laws of God? And most churches do help people and feed the poor. They also do lots of things in the community, offering free counsel for troubled families, drug programs to help get people off of drugs. Why is it everyone can spend their money as they like buying alchol or what ever and nothing is said, but give back what belongs to God and ” the church” is so bad. If your not giving to the church why are you worried about what we do with our money that we work for?

      1. Rev2 years ago

        They just want the extra money to fund their entitlement programs.

  10. jthauthor2 years ago

    Over the longer haul, what does this all mean for those who call themselves Christians in this 21st century? Four potentially disparate observations: 1) Going forward, marriage will be defined by cultural whims du jour. 2) This drift to moral relativism continues to be driven by global technology. 3) Those who have persecuted in the name of Christ will get a taste of their own medicine. 4) Marriage has a future only to the degree that the product can be demonstrated superior in a marketplace of ever more diverse and often personally satisfying alternatives.

  11. janes2 years ago

    It is so depressing that Obama is coming to Kenya.We pray he will not endorse gayism in our society.

  12. Haley2 years ago

    I am so glad that gay marrige is finally legalized. It really makes me sad that people can’t see past old indoctrined beliefs and realize that the world is heading to a more progressive state of mind. To anyone who claims that gay marrige is wrong because they cannot biologically reproduce the way the bible says a man and woman should, have you not noticed that we are in a population crisis? The last thing we need is more people having children. The earth can barely hold what we have now without the total destruction of our natural resources. And there are so so many babies and children that need homes, that need families. Gay people adopting helps that as well. According to the bible, shrimp is an abomination, you shouldn’t wear two types of fabric together, and you can’t plant certain crops next to each other. Every time I ask a christian why they don’t consider these sins any more, they reply that it is because Jesus Christ forgave us of these sins. Did he not forgive homosexuality as well? Homosexuality is not in the ten commandments, it is not listed anywhere in the new testament, and it’s barely even mentioned in the old testament. How women should conduct themselves during their time of the month is discussed way more in the bible and yet everyone disregards those sins. People against homosexuality are not Christians, they’re bigots, plain and simple. The world is changing people, and either change with it or die sad and angry and pathetic as all the old bigots are doing as we speak.

    1. Alexandra2 years ago

      You’re sadly misinformed.

      Overpopulation isn’t even an issue.

      “Progressive” state of mind? Progressing to WHAT?

      And yes, homosexuality IS touched upon in the New Testament. Romans 1:26-27 states: “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

      And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”

      People against homosexuality are people against SIN. It’s not natural.

      1. vincent trevino2 years ago

        We are all sinners. God loves us all, Jesus paid for our sins on the cross. Our responsability to Him is to follow Him in his ways and make beleivers out of non beleivers. To follow Christ means to do away with your sin. Is homosexuality right? No it isn’t, but im not going to hate you for it. My only question is why is it needed to get married by a church and have the Lord be a witness to your vows if you do not know him?

      2. Ryan2 years ago

        You are so right, Alexandra.

  13. Arie Berman2 years ago

    (What if) my faith demands that I kill you. Should the government interfere with my religious beliefs? Why? …
    There’s a long history of religions that required human sacrifice.
    We cannot separate the law from religion without redefining religion, or eliminating much of the law.
    But if the law redefines religion, the redefinition would be based on our religious beliefs, so there cannot be true separation between government and religion.
    There can of course be separation of church and state – that is to say, the state can be separated from any church, but not from religion or religious beliefs.
    Those religious beliefs that currently influence the law could be different than your beliefs: There are after all, other citizens who have different beliefs than you, and they count too!

  14. joseph2 years ago

    Not right read Leviticus 18 22 30 romans 1 22 32

  15. Bo chmielewski2 years ago

    My question is that since guy couples will be allowed to get married in church how about the bible ?
    Will there be changes made regards to that ?
    Or this will be done against our bible and God’s decision

  16. Jc Fisher2 years ago

    If I didn’t believe in God (I always have), the past week would help convince me that there IS a loving God in charge. THANK GOD for marriage equality! And God bless my church, the Episcopal Church, which recognizes that GOD made made some of God’s children lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender (as well as straight, of course), and God CALLS people to marry consistent w/ the way God made them. God is good, Alleluia!!!

    1. Cookie2 years ago

      I don’t know how as a christian you can applaud the SCOTUS decision. Do you not see how this decision opens the door to polyamorous unions, NAMBILA UNIONS, no age consent in marriage etc? But you’re right God is alive but homosexual marriage is from the pit of hell.

      1. JeffK6272 years ago

        I assume by “NAMBILA” you mean NAMBLA. That is nonsense, as is your statement about “no age [of] consent in marriage etc”. There is no viable movement to legalize child abuse, only marriage between consenting ADULTS.

        1. Colossus2 years ago

          Where in the majority’s opinion to redefine marriage and make a new law do the words “consenting ADULTS” appear? Furthermore, where are the age limitations in the opinion? Neither are there, just as plural marriage restrictions are non-existent in the opinion. You people (that’s right, you idiot people) who wanted to grease the slope of redefining marriage can now live with the consequences of what you fought so desperately for.

        2. Ursula2 years ago

          Actually, the recent incredible support in the US of religions which support and encourage marriage to children AND the “sexual rights” of children is going to make this another inevitability. Your president and your candidate both vehemently denounced gay marriage 6 years ago. The wind. In 6 years tops, marriage to and sex with children will be protected by the government.

      2. Ben2 years ago

        Yeah what Christian would be in favor of a polyamorous union? Like the one the Patriarch Jacob had. Or you know that pesky King David. Or every King or Israel after him. Good thing god spoke out so clearly against it. Oh wait he didn’t.

        But at least Jesus brought up how sinful being gay is and how anyone who is gay is going to hell. Oh wait, he never mentioned it? But he did mention that men who remarry commit adultery? (provided the divorce wasn’t for sexual immorality) Good thing churches won’t let people commit adultery in their church. Oh wait they do.

        1. Freeda2 years ago

          Ben, since you understand the Bible so well, why don’t you live it’s truth? Homosexuality is a sin because it is harmful to one’s own body which is a sin. You may not like it, but there it is. In the same manner, so is adultery, murder, lying, gossiping, fornication, anger, bitterness, strife, fear, pride, and the list goes on and on. You can’t change what sin is because you don’t like it. And for your sake, don’t play with God. You may absolutely regret doing that. Just because you may not believe in God, does not make your beliefs true.

          1. Christopher Bacot1 year ago

            Or how about this…I don’t believe in a Christian God or Bible or your “rules”, we live in the United States, a secular society and your religious beliefs should GUIDE YOUR LIFE! You can pray for me, you can believe I’m going to “hell”. But what you CANNOT do is force me to live by your faith.

    2. Manuel2 years ago

      Love you sister, remember… God called us to multiply and fill the earth, he did not call us to marrie. Marriage is a result of a man and a woman paring up and multiplying.

    3. Roman Catholic2 years ago

      Then why your god made some people necrophiliacs, zoophiles etc…. I guess your god is more cruel then mine. My God gave me free will to do whats right and a will to avoid temptation.

    4. Ursula2 years ago

      Actually God calls us to cure the sick. Not institutionalize our sicknessnes.

  17. Paula Warnes2 years ago

    The Catholic Church in the U.S. has been in a state of upheaval since Vat. II, and lost perceived authority with the abuse scandals. Although a majority of U.S. Catholics are misled, the teachings of the Church on this matter have never changed.

  18. Leonard A ka2 years ago

    Homosexual marriage???? It is a government marriage. Like in China. Doesn’t mean anything except an extra bowl of rice.

  19. Chrissy2 years ago

    This feels like a plan to get rid of religion all together. The government knows good and well we are not to partake in the sins of others, this is not a joke to me I take this seriously I don’t care how the secular world feels about my religion, it matters to me and this is a lifestyle that comes with me where ever I go.

    Get married if that’s what you want to do but my business and the church shouldn’t be affected. What I’m hearing is church owned institutions either have to shut down, be sued or include sin. I think it’s time for a secession, Christians are no longer fit for America.

    I’m trying to figure out why people actually think this is fair. All the people who completely accepts you and you want to go after this religion, why?

    1. Hugh Vincelette2 years ago

      If you wonder whether equality and religious freedom can co-exist peacefully, you need look no further than Canada. No religious organization that disagrees with same-sex marriage is compelled to perform such marriages. The rare exception is with government marrrige clerks issing marriage licences. They are public servants paid out of tax dollars and must obey the laws of the land. But after over a decade of legalized equality , no ones freedom of religion is impacted. If those opposed had won, it would have been the pandering of the state to a particular set of religious beliefs. From a personal perspective, however, I do not for a moment acept that opposition to same-sex marriage had anything to do with nuptials , but was simply a somewhat more palatable vehicle for the standard anti-gay bigotry and discrimination. Being opposed to someone elses marriage because of your religious beliefs is like being angry at somone for eating a donut because you’re on a diet.

      1. Christopher Bacot1 year ago

        Very, very well said! Some Christians in the United States have taken this decision as a direct assault on their beliefs. This is the most egotistical thing I have truly ever heard. This is about the LGBT community and equality. This is OUR victory and has NOTHING to do with Christianity or straight people. It’s about legal and financial recognition and protections afforded with the institution. The ONLY link with Christianity is that they have made it so difficult for us to get here. But we made it. GET OVER IT!

    2. Mike2 years ago

      Are you aware some religions in the US, including some Christian sects are fine with same sex marriage? Why do so many religious people assume that their personal sect is the end all and be all and should be the one religious sect all laws are based on?
      Just because you call yourself Christian doesn’t mean all Christians agree with you.
      As has been amply demonstrated by other commenters, many Christians forget how divorce and adultery is treated in the Bible, yet many churches (and it’s congregants) are happy to allow such abominations marry in their church.
      This is called cherry picking the parts of the Bible you want to follow, and ignoring the parts you don’t want to follow.

      Let those who are without sin to cast a stone.
      Judge not, lest ye be judged.

      “The First Amendment’s Establishment Clause prohibits the government from making any law “respecting an establishment of religion.” This clause not only forbids the government from establishing an official religion, but also prohibits government actions that unduly favor one religion over another. It also prohibits the government from unduly preferring religion over non-religion, or non-religion over religion.”

      1. Ursula2 years ago

        After the gospel quote your camp uses to defend yourselves, Christ told the woman: Go and sin no more. You always leave that part out

  20. mike2 years ago

    Yall are ridiculous…lmao just let people live their lives…gays will be gays blacks will be blacks…and etc…the only reason the world is so accepting of gays is $$$$$…there are more of them then blacks and mexicans combined…think about…they are just gunna market towards you and rape your pockets by saying they love gay people…money is the root of all evil…its economics…lmao before long yall will be in public housing together on welfare…hah dont believe me just watch

    1. Evanglist D Williams2 years ago

      Excuse me it is the love of money is the root of all evil, you are ridiculous in saying let gays be gays God’s word is God’s word this is sin and it is sending people strait to hell and by saying let everything be as they are will hold no water with God, my friend before economics there was sin, I don’t care if you are African American, Mexican, Chinese or whatever race, what’s happening here in the word Romans 1:21 Because that when they knew God, they glorified Him not as God neither were thankful but became vain in their imaginations and their foolish heart was darkened. Verse 22 Professing themselves as wise they became fools 23. And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds and four footed beasts, and creeping things 24. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts to dishonor their own bodies between themselves. 25. Who changed the truth of God into a lie
      and worshipped the and serve the creature more than the creator and the rest for this cause God gave them up to vile affections for even there women changed the natural use which is against nature burned in their lust for one another and men with men leaving the natural use of woman God turn them over to a reprobate mind. This is the word of the Lord.

      1. David2 years ago

        Isaiah 5:20King James Version (KJV)

        20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

    2. Reginald2 years ago

      Lol, wut

      You said…
      “the only reason the world is so accepting of gays is $$$$$…there are more of them then blacks and mexicans combined”

      Hispanic and Latino Americans amount to 17.1% of the population
      African Americans amount to 13.2% of the population

      and the Gays

      The National Health Interview Survey, which is the government’s premier tool for annually assessing Americans’ health and behaviors, found that 1.6 percent of adults self-identify as gay or lesbian, and 0.7 percent consider themselves bisexual.Jul 15, 2014

    3. Dr. J2 years ago

      I am so sick of folks talking about race and sexual orientation in the same breath. Such ignorance. Race is about a skin color that one comes into the world with and has no say about. Sexual orientation, despite what people say, does not happen at birth since we are not born into this world having sex. Please stop integrating the two concepts.

      1. Jennifer2 years ago

        As Alveda King has said: “I have met many ex-homosexuals just as I have met many ex-husbands, ex-wives, ex-drug addicts and ex-lawyers. Yet I have never met an ex-Negro, ex-Caucasian or ex-Native American.”

        People like to claim they were born in a certain way but where does society draw that line? Some can claim they are born as a pedophile, alcoholic, or wife beater. So what? We each have our own struggles, some are greater than others. This doesn’t mean we crumble in sin and immortally and violate others.

        People have their own choices, that’s what was so great about living in America. However, requiring others to be on board and implementing laws that especially undermine the beliefs of a religious institution is basically trading one person’s right for another. That is not a license to hate others; Jesus teaches to be loving towards everyone. We love you enough to tell you the truth and we should not be persecuted for these actions.

        1. Enlightened2 years ago

          This book was written by MAN it the time of the flat earth and the planets revolved around us . The concept of sexual orientation did not exist. And did Lot offer his daughters instead of? very Christian of him. Where does it say follow the bible to be saved? If you trully believe that Why are you not having rapists marry their victim, stoning your un willful children, Stay with your wife while she is unclean

  21. oko2 years ago

    Since the law is going the way of liberalism hope the same gay or lesbian couples will not be allowd to adopt a child.

    1. Jim2 years ago


  22. Roman Catholic2 years ago

    In Roman Catholic religion homosexuality is a sin. Person that keeps quiet about , praises or fights for rights of homosexuality is committing a sin in the eyes of Church. My religion is a big part of my make up as human being. And I can not separate myself into secular and spiritual entities. My life and actions are governed by my religion and church. Now the government rules that homosexuality is the same as heterosexuality in the eyes of the law. I ask you, if i am a judge that officiates over a homosexual marriage, as the law commends, am i not sinning against my God? I ask you, if i am a baker and are asked to create a cake for the celebration of gay marriage, am i not committing a sin by partaking in their celebration? I ask you, do i follow the laws of my religion, which will lead me to everlasting life, or, do i follow the laws of the land? I ask you, if i believe in the teachings of my church, am i being discriminatory? I ask you, do i have right to practice my beliefs?
    Roman Catholic

    1. eaja2 years ago

      There were only five states where WE THE PEOPLE voted to “legalize gay marriage”, and those were the states with the highest percent of Catholics.

      How do you explain that?

      1. Don2 years ago

        If only 5 states voted for gay marriage then why did they make legal. That is not the will of the people.WAKE UP AMERCIA

        1. Mike2 years ago

          Since when are basic human rights subject to the vote of the people?
          Are you going to vote on slavery too? Interracial marriage?

          Of course not. That’s why they are called basic human rights.
          And that is why the Supreme Court of United States of America enforced those rights across the USA regardless of what you or think of them.
          Otherwise we would be able to vote that YOU should be a slave.

          1. Roman Catholic2 years ago

            Marriage is not a basic human right but a sacrament between woman and a man that is conformed in God. Thats what my church says and that is what i believe in. And for people who do not know church is not a building or an institution but all Roman Catholics – we are the church.

    2. ahp2 years ago

      You might need to get yourself to the Vatican or a theocratic country. Would you ask a couple if they had been previously married when they come for that cake? Would you deny them based on the fact that divorce is a sin? Would you ask the bride-to-be if she was on birth control? Wouldn’t you making a cake for any of those people be supporting their sin?

    3. Doug Muder2 years ago

      Remarriage after divorce is also a sin, but for some reason none of these same issues ever get raised. As far as I know, no baker refuses to make a wedding cake for a second marriage.

      What this says to me is that the real issue isn’t sin, it’s bigotry. A lot of people don’t like gays and don’t like them getting married, so they’re using their religion as an excuse to act out.

      1. Craig2 years ago

        Remarriage after divorce is not always sin. How would a baker know that? The Bible is very clear that homosexuality and lesbianism are sinful behaviors along with a lot of other sins. Any person voluntarily participating or attending a same sex wedding is validating and approving of it. For a Christian that would be sin.

  23. Matthew Peterson2 years ago

    Question. Why all the hate from Christian on social media over the supreme court decision? First of all Christians please remember Jesus greatest commandment.. Matthew 22: 37-40 Jesus replied: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.” This is the first and greatest commandment And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’ All the law and Prophets hang on these two commandments….
    So if you follow these simple rules expecially the second one. We might stop spreading so much hate?? Would you like someone judging you when themselves have sin. Saying your going to hell when you or not even Jesus Chirst have that judgment? I do not condone homosexuality but at the same time I expect people for who they are and show them love and acceptance and allow God to work thu me if he choose.

    1. Peter Chua2 years ago

      We can still love our neighbor but we can disagree with his support for same sex marriage! America has slowly been drifting away from God who has blessed us for
      so many years and it is time for us to turn back to Him.

    2. Mike2 years ago

      Another example of the devil quoting the bible and even out of context!!!

      This is just a small example why this country is in such a moral mess!

    3. Ray2 years ago

      it’s not hate it’s love. If your gay best friend was drowning in water would you not help him? Therefore if your gay best friend was drowning in sin would you not try to save him from death?

  24. Dita Logos2 years ago

    If someone told me that this would happen, I would’ve told them to stop smoking crack. It is not freedom of religion if the only religions who are allowed to keep tax exempt status are those who agree or affirm gay marriage. There is no freedom in allowing only one opinion to exist in peace.
    Orthodox Judaism, Islam, Coptic Christians, Catholics all have text against the practice of homosexuality. They are focused on the Christians but we aren’t the only ones who would be persecuted. We will fight though. That much I know.

  25. Marian2 years ago

    In the beginning God created heaven and earth. He created man (Adam) and woman (Eve) to be his help meet. (Wife). He did not create man to marry man, nor woman to marry woman. God loves us all. However, same sex relationships are an abomination before God. Yes!!!!!!! Sin is sin. John 3:16 says for God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life. This decision by the supreme court is very disturbing!!!!! They think nothing of the children of this world. Prayer has been taken out of our schools , sex traficking has come into our cities. Let’s have Prayer put back in our Schools!!!!!!!!! …This court decision is not of God!!!! Romans 10:9-10 if though shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart , that God has raised from the dead, you will be saved for with the heart one believes unto righteousness ,and with the mouth confession is made .unto salvation. One question if it’s so right, why hide in the closet?……whenever we hide we know something is wrong????

  26. Nick2 years ago

    Hate the sin, love the sinners. or hate the disease, love the patient.

    1. Peter Chua2 years ago

      Well said Nick, agree with that statement.

    2. Kevin2 years ago

      Hate the religion, love the religious.

  27. John2 years ago

    I’m sure glad I’m not the only one who wonders why the “Catholic” Supreme Court justice would DENY this fundamental religious right to the 95.5% of Americans who CLAIM to follow Jesus, for the express purpose of giving that right ONLY to the 0.37% who “identify as gay”.

  28. B. Weltsch2 years ago

    We wouldn’t have this mess if the government had stayed out of marriage in the first place. Historically, marriage was religious function only; a covenant between a man, woman, and God. But government is greedy and somewhere along the line somebody decided we should pay a ransom to the government to obtain it’s permission (or “blessing”) to get married, technically violating the First Amendment and co-opting marriage.

  29. NON2 years ago

    Hate the Sin Not the Sinner. All Sin is equally bad in GOD’s eye’s. So Love all equally and fight against Sin. GOD Loves you all. This is just one step in the many steps toward the 2nd coming of Jesus. Just look at the talk (pope) about having church and state combined with Sunday becoming a law. We have a world that is coming to an end soon, so all that can be said about this county going wrong is pick up your bible and study with your kids so you can be prepared. If we could all live by GODs Law. Think about how great this earth would be. No crime, no lying, no cheating, Some might call it heaven. NO we continue to live by what we (humans) thing is best. Look where it has gotten us. Good luck and GOD bless you all.

  30. Gary Mathis2 years ago

    I don’t want to “live in peace” with liberals.

    1. John2 years ago

      I don’t want to “live in peace” with mentally ill liberals either.

      I also don’t want to live in a country which made a pact with the devil, as our “Supreme Court” just did.

  31. jp2 years ago

    All non profits would be barred from funds. Two words…planned parenthood…No more tax funding.yay! God will provide for churches…

  32. James McCollom2 years ago

    The Supreme Court decision is truly horrifying. A couple of years ago I was in a car with a friend of my sister’s. The fellow leaned over to me as I was seated in the passenger seat and yelled, “You are a bigot.” I was completely shocked. He knew that I was Catholic. Justice Kennedy has single-handedly set a bottom-of-the-barrel tone for this dialogue. The Northeastern intellectuals have now made it vogue to vilify and it was a Supreme Court justice who led the way.

  33. reuben pringle2 years ago

    What can you say other than God shed his light on thee(USA) we are now bigger than God untouchable from God, what can God do to us we have the LAW with us same thoughts of Judas and the world was change after the temple law was enforced.

    1. Carrie2 years ago

      You will never be bigger than God. The law is not above God. God will surprise all of you with his arriving and you will regret it. God always wins.

  34. Zac2 years ago

    Our country is governed by a constitution not the bible. That doesn’t mean we can’t live better as Christians. I am afraid that the liberals that have screamed for the separation of church and state will now pressure religious institutions through legal action to accept/accommodate homosexualality. Thus making the government God. Everyone needs to go read 1984 again.

  35. Robert Petty2 years ago

    It is not my decision on weather it is right or wrong for same sex couples to be married.
    The Bible is more than clear about homosexual activities. I know we are all sinners . BUT if the Supreme Court rules that my Pastor has to go against the Bible and marry same sex couples. Then the Supreme Court is making my Pastor commit a sin. The separation of Church and state is then in grave danger.
    When I saw our Nations Capitol displayed in the rain bow colors I almost blew a gasket. President Obama ( BAD DECISION )
    This is not the first time the Supreme Court has made a travesty of the Constitution of the United States . If our fore fathers could see what has been done and the ruthless and corrupt politicians , they would go back and put safeguards to keep this from happening.

    1. Ayo2 years ago

      This ruling does not mandate churches marry anyone they choose not to marry, whether it’s a gay couple, a couple unequally yoked, or a couple with a history of abuse

      1. John2 years ago

        Actually, any church which gets the 501 (c)3 exemption (which is more than 90% of them) is already prohibited from speaking the TRUTH about what the Holy Bible requires for punishment of homosexuals.

  36. lala292 years ago

    There’s a separation of church and state. All churches have to do is shut down and have Internet church. Problem solved.

  37. Natalia Rackstraw2 years ago

    Why is everyone so upset about same sex marriage? I don’t understand what an adult do in their bedroom with another adult has anything to do with anyone else. Is it about money or what?

    1. Nolly2 years ago

      It will affect the future generation that is going to raised with the very confusing idea that boy/girl or mum/dad or wife/husband does not mean much… Now it would be whatever! What a mess!!! It will certainly affect the people that hold a different opinion as they will be probably be silenced, persecuted or even jailed for that sole reason. It is already happening!!! Just wait and see…

      1. Margie Bateman Osgood2 years ago

        Nolly, it will mean the same as it always did, the same as every other couple, it will mean LOVE that is the most important thing any relationship should mean. Most kids now have friends with same sex partners for “parents” and you know what? Most of the don’t mind! I would rather see two moms or two dads than I would a broken home with a deadbeat dad or a mom that deserted them, any day!

        1. Gman2 years ago

          The problem with your argument is you reference straight marriage between a man and a woman as being inferior or more likely to be unsuccessful than gay marriage. Based on what evidence? You cite you’d rather have two gay people in love raising a child than a straight couple with a deadbeat dad. As if gay people don’t have the capacity to be deadbeats. Terrible argument you present.

        2. Nolly2 years ago

          Maggie, love argument alone is not going to fix the messed society the future generation is going to grow into, being bombarded from kindergarten with the gay propaganda. I wish it was just through friends but not, a deCision like this, is going to Change too many things, and young minds are probably the first thing they are going to work on. When there is order, then you know where the disorder is. When there is no order, then, it is Chaos!! As for the other argument, there are good and bad mom/dads in both type of families. that does not make one better than the other as a general rule. Case by Case. But depriving a Child of his/her mom or dad out of prinCiple is a Crime. Its their right. It is God’s given right! So it is as a general rule a worse arrangement, independently of love levels… Love is not going to give a Child a mom when he is raised by two dads, not a dad when raised by two moms… Some kids will feel the gap more than others, and making the world around them fit into their personal CirCumstanCes may or may not feel this gap. Their parents may only be a 2% of the population but they want the 98% left bow and Clap at their lifestyle all the same!!!

    2. Anonymous2 years ago

      Because events that debase culture and institutions that have survived for thousands of years tend to be in people’s interests. The institution of marriage is a sacred one in the first world and laws that change tradition will of course upset people.

      1. Mary2 years ago

        My mother-in-law got an annulment from the Catholic church after 23 years of marriage and 5 kids. Of course, if she didn’t have the money to pay for it she wouldn’t have gotten it. Nothing is sacred anymore.

    3. fiona2 years ago

      It is because the state will be interested in teaching that all forms of sexual activity and surrogacy are normal to our children … they are in our childrens bedroom.

    4. noname2 years ago

      God created women out of man to be with man, not man to be with another man or women to be with another women, this passing of the law is the worse that could happen in America, the bible forbids this type of behavior gotquestions.org/gay-marriage.html, why allow it now, america the great is going down hill, the devil is alive

  38. Louise Delaney2 years ago

    It could be possible that the Council of Trent, circa 1540s, was the culprit for this century’s so-called ‘marriage rights’ woes.
    Perhaps our USA legislators should immediately enact a Personal Commitment Contract piece of legislation – available to ANY TWO people who desire a binding civil legal contract with all the benefits, obligations, responsibilities, and ramifications of our current ‘marriage’ contract. Reserve the ‘marriage’ part of this for a social/religious/cultural ceremony which may or may not be performed and has no legal connection whatsoever.

    1. Del2 years ago

      I agree completely. There is not reason to deny two committed adults from making a legal commitment.

      1. Gman2 years ago

        There are many commitments adults make without needing to make a legal issue out of it.

  39. Ally2 years ago

    Sad, sad day in history. This ruling to allow same sex marriage has opened doors for God to pour out his judgments on America. America was founded on Christian laws and that is what made us great! Unless there is a great awakening in America, we will never be great again. I am terrified for this country and I feel like throwing up! GOD FORGIVE US!!!

    1. Angad Bhogal1 year ago

      Why though? This has nothing to do with you or your life. And enough of the whining about the younger generation who are in fact much more educated, intelligent, aware, and ready for the future and its change than are the older generations.

  40. Jeanette Crumpler2 years ago

    I still find it ironic that any place or nation would be so prejudiced about same sex rights of any kind. Rights are rights and all should have them. Even serial killers have the right to a trial and often show up in some of the above named churches and organizations before and after their crimes. And televangelists who have done criminal acts do the same as well not to mention their eternal fleecing of their congregations and others.

  41. D. Stacy Sims2 years ago

    Gonna be lawsuit after lawsuit the some states will quit doing marriage all together.

  42. L.Briller2 years ago

    I am age 33, and very upsetting the ruling ended to be, now for one comment that someone brought up about GOD, hunny, there is only one GOD who of coarse wakes you everyday, and one DEVIL. Why is all the weather gone crazy everywhere??? Because GOD is UPSET!!! While politics worry about gayness, there are more important things to worry about ruling like killing, kidnapping, instead the focus is on boy boy, girl girl marriage, can 2 outlets turn on a lamp, NO, it calls for an outlet and a plug. Come on, GOD is UPSET, and its so sad that the new generation of children are confused, my four year old may think she can have kids by another girl, what happend to prayers in school, what happened to ppl going to church, times have slipped way down. This will cause many problems with this ruling, and I believe that if a church or whom ever does not allow or will not allow gay weddings etc…should have their rights to decline, evidently the non believers matters don’t count, so we should have a right or pastors to decline to proceed a marriage by choice, they know what’s best, they don’t want to go to hell Bound because they go the opposite of the word of the Bible, its upsetting. It’s everyone’s choice, but sad of ruling big problems ahead…very big problems, like public restrooms for any sex to go in, come on now, let a child predator claim their gay, and let one of your children be in the restroom, GUESS WHAT, problems there will be. Politically devoting and Bible reading should be done before re ruling, I’m sure heads will turns. I agree with Huckleberry on this one. If dissapoints anyone, guess what, cannot argue with the true word of the Bible. Only one GOD, one man with a woman. Boy the devil is really busy!!!

    1. Daniel2 years ago

      Why is it that many of the folks so upset and fearful of marriage equality have such poor grammar and spelling skills? And who is Huckleberry anyway? Huckleberry Hound? Huckleberry Finn? How would my marriage possibly diminish someone else’s? The churches are protected against allowing wedding ceremonies if they object to the couple’s “impediment”, whether it be divorce, close familial relationship, or gender. As for business accommodation, if someone refuses to make a cake, for example, there is discrimination involved. Selling me a three-tier cake with buttercream icing and flowers around the base should not go against anyone’s religion. They might worry about how fat I might get but that is my business. Business is done in a secular setting. Nobody in business should hang a sign in the window, saying “No Jews”, as was done in nazi Germany. Their sign should say “We’re glad you chose us!”

      1. Najeeb Shah2 years ago

        oo i has bad grammer my viewz are falsee .

        nice logic

      2. shawnee18952 years ago

        Yep, he sure is. Amen.

  43. Brando2 years ago

    I have been blissfully single for 68 years. Why at this point would I change what works?
    Others choosing to marry to whom or what little interests me.

    There are some; it would appear, ignored other factors which do trouble me..

    How can the government now prohibit bigamy (polygamy and polyandry)
    That is certainly as discriminatory as the ban on “gay” marriage.
    If the CEOs of say FORD and FIAT-Chrysler were to wed, could they not proclaim a
    family owned enterprise, and thus avoid any accusation of Monopoly.

    Imagine a four sided marriage; indulge me, Jindal-Bush-Obama-Kennedy.
    Now there’s a royal quartet worthy of, ‘The Game of Thrones’.

    1. david2 years ago


    2. future issues2 years ago

      The other thing with these type of marriages is the having kids. When a man an women marry they naturally can have kids unless something is wrong. The next issue is the same as when a wife decides to hyphenate her name, after five generations everyone’s last names will be more and 30 characters long we will be reduced to having numbers instead of heritage and our names.

  44. Dick2 years ago

    If any two can be married, why is there a limit to two? That’s not fair to bi-sexuals. If having children is not an issue, can cousins be married? How about siblings? Who is to draw the line? Surely not religious organizations. They are now excluded from making rules. Nancy Pelosi said they should pass the ACA law to find out what was in it. The new rule is pass a law and wait for the Supreme Court to decide what it means. Wording in the law is not important to liberal appointees.

    1. MikeyMo2 years ago

      Religion is something personal, so religious organizations should never be allowed to make rules (based on their religion) that would affect people who don’t belong to either that religion or to no religion at all.

    2. Margie Bateman Osgood2 years ago

      Incest is a totally different thing, don’t even go there.

      1. Najeeb Shah2 years ago

        how? Its just as unnatural .

        the bond of marriage has been reserved for the opposite sex since the dawn of time .

    3. Naomi2 years ago

      The difference between bigamy & incest and gay marriage is that bigamy and incest are illegal, whereas homosexuality is not. Aside from being against the law, incest also clearly has significant negative effects. Incestuous relationships rarely begin when the parties both turn 18 or whatever the legal marrying age is in a particular state. It usually begins in childhood, where one of the parties is victimized by the other. This obviously can’t be legally condoned. Not to mention the negative health effects on the children born of in-breeding.

      None of this applies to SSM.

  45. M.J.Bradley2 years ago

    The Supreme Court judges just ‘lit the fuse’ by their gay marriage ruling. We will observe the consequences of Babylon ‘re-visited’ in America.

    1. shawnee18952 years ago


  46. charles2 years ago

    The Utah decision was not a compromise. It was codify discrimination against LGBT people as long as someone has “deeply held religious convictions”.

    Ultimately businesses are going to be required to provide equal services to LGBT people or cease providing those services in general. Will a Church ever be forced to preform or host a gay wedding? No. Will a Church probably be forced to rent none religious areas, such as banquet halls, to gay people? Yes, if they are renting to heterosexual marriage they will have to rent to LGBT marriage.

  47. Chris Vogel2 years ago

    It’s time that they paid taxes; no more freeloading.

    1. D. Stacy Sims2 years ago

      It time for everybody to pay taxes. 15% flat tax.

  48. Philly Jimi2 years ago

    Look if your religion teaches you to hate homosexuals that is fine. Attending a church or belonging to a religious organization is a choice. Attending a religious school is also a choice. If their religion teaches you are required to hate and shun homosexual people, that is your choice. If a private non-public organization wants to exclude homosexuals they have every right to do so.

    All other non-private public institutions can not discriminate based on sexual preferences. Of course exactly what is a religious organization? That is a something that needs to be more clearly defined.

    The First Amendment protect the minority from the religions of the majority. This in not a Christian country. It is a secular country where every citizen has the right to practice the religion of their choice. Or you can be like me and be free of the superstitious nonsense. If god is real, we would all know.

    1. DJ2 years ago

      In my life, God is Real. Christianity is a Spiritual Religion based on faith. No one can prove it to you, only experience it. We have a western, rational mindset and we are not accustomed to Spiritual things. If we cannot see or touch something, we believe it does not exist. Pray and meditate and ask God for yourself.

      1. Angad Bhogal1 year ago

        What is the problem with people of different sexual orientations getting married, though? I love how you guys go on about what you cannot see or touch, but then you completely disregard the component of mental health. Sure, it’s not quite as predetermined as race is, but sexual orientation is still a very natural, innate feeling and no amount of denying is going to change that. The only difference now is that people can openly admit that they love somebody of the same sex without getting killed or treated like trash. There is no lack of morality. There is a higher deal or morality now that people can actually seek the help that they need instead of being bound to unhealthy relationships, forced to conform to a certain society, and the like. Keep your beliefs out of people’s marriages. Thank you.

  49. Shana2 years ago

    LOVE!!! FOR THE WIN!!!!!

    1. Jesse2 years ago

      Love has nothing to do with the Supreme Court ruling, and really nothing to do with the institution of marriage for that matter. The ruling was about equality, that’s it.

  50. tonka2 years ago

    If we redefine marriage, it will now be more likely it will be redefined again. Example, if someone wants to marry 2 other people for example and have a trio marriage we can’t discriminate against them, or polygamy, or if someone wants to marry a family member. If we have redefined marriage, it now has the possibility of being redefined based on how anyone wants to view marriage according to their preference of sexual orientation. That could mean threesome or foursome marriages, or whatever extreme you want, because we would be discriminating against their sexual preference to be in a relationship with multiple people, etc…. We have now set a precedence to redefine marriage however which way anyone wants, not just same sex marriage, but now the possibilities are wide open to the imagination to redefine it.

  51. Nmb2 years ago

    I only have 1 relevant argument: not all people are christians!! So, when society decides to discuss a certain topic that affects EVERYONE, all gods need to take a secondary role and get cozy because no god is more or less than the other, and they all gotta share territory!

    So in case you forgot: the constitution provides grounds for respect and dignity for all, regardless of your mythological preferences!! So respect if you wanna be respected.

  52. Nmb2 years ago

    I only had 1 relevant argument: we, the people, are free and are not all christians!!! So no god can be more or less important… they all take a secondary role when society discusses what’s best for EVERYONE !!

  53. Smith1012 years ago

    Well marriage has traditionally been defined as a religious institution. So knowing how most religions feel about gays why would they won’t to follow in those foot steps. Also what’s next marry your dog your horse where is the end people this is not about laws it’s about morality and it’s breakdown in our country if you can’t see how our country’s values have fallen apart your blind I personally don’t care what people do in there bedroom. I can say that leagalizng somthing dosnt make it right. And if you think this is not going to open the door for other laws and ideas to be shoved down people’s throats your all fools

  54. William2 years ago

    First Amendment – Religion and Expression. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    I don’t want your god in my government. Especially a god that preaches hate and promotes ignorance. Is gay marriage physically hurting you? What do you think is going to happen? Absolutely nothing. You wouldn’t even notice it if it wasn’t plastered all over the media. Practice what you preach, acceptance and tolerance.

    1. M2 years ago

      Unfortunately you are ignorant of G-D His Word and morality the hate you conceive of is imaginary but the G-D I know will judge You for your Sins unless you repent and turn from them it will be your choice to refuse G-D’s plan of salvation but not allowing Christians to choose to not allow homosexuals to rule over them makes you a hypocrite I pray that you will not continue to be fooled by our leaders so called our media our professors those who have forgotten that our freedom depends on the will of G-D not homosexuals or their perverted lifestyle or you Thank G-D that I can say No Homosexual I do not want to participate in your Sins

    2. memyself2 years ago

      You’re the pot calling the kettle black. Acceptance and tolerance as long as it’s me to the accepting and being tolerant right? How come you won’t accept my views? I guess your not tolerant you just expect everyone else to be accepting of your views and tolerate your opinions. Most totally accept and tolerate that you and others are gay. I really don’t care but that’s not good enough for you. You want to change my views, my religion and my moral compass. You can’t agree to disagree you want to change me. I don’t want to change you, I don’t want your views or opinions. You can have them, I will listen but I won’t change. YOU won’t ACCEPT that or TOLERATE that so you want to change. The difference between my view and yours is simple. If you think guns are bad you want to take every gun away from everyone. I just won’t buy a gun! If you think soda is unhealthy you want to ban soda. If I think they’re unhealthy I won’t buy the damn soda. It goes on but I’m sure you don’t agree even though it’s fact. I’m OK with you being gay, not buying a gun or eating unhealthy just stop trying to make me you. I don’t want to be you.

    3. Robin2 years ago

      I don’t want your government in my Church. THAT is actually what the first amendment protects.

      1. Indigo Vintege2 years ago

        You obviously have no idea how to read or any clue on the founding fathers that founded our country.

        The Amendment CLEARLY states “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

        It addresses both sides of the spectrum, but it directly states that NO religious establishment shall receive special treatment! So yes, you CAN practice religion freely. But you cannot use religion to govern the government or public institutions.

        It’s not right.

        It’s people like hypocritical Christians who don’t even know how to read yet use a book that is thousands of years old and written in a different language to make laws that make me question humanity.

      2. Ayodele2 years ago

        This ruling was regarding the 14th amendment so the 1st isn’t really the point.

    4. Sparkee2 years ago

      That “acceptance” and “tolerance” goes both ways.

      1. Farty2 years ago

        Actually it doesn’t.

    5. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

      William said “…. Is gay marriage physically hurting you?

      So, the only standard we should use is whether we are being physically abused? No way to account for the fear of oppression which is being rained down upon the religious people by the government? No way to account for the quick retribution meted out by organizations against people who speak their mind?

      As for your question and reply: “What do you think is going to happen? Absolutely nothing..”

      I could quickly come up with many studies showing not only what is happening now, but what is projected to happen because of this issue, and your response of “Absolutely nothing..” is not even close! Let me give you one link that quotes at least 15 sources (not including the religiously based ”closed-minded” ones) showing you are wrong. mormonnewsroom.org/article/the-d…

      1. WillaMay2 years ago

        Yes, gay marriage IS hurting people. Because people who are religious should not be forced to go against their beliefs under the threat of being seen as a “bigot.” You may not care about being imoral and burning in hell for your sins, but don’t try and drag everybody else down with you.

        Yes, forcing someone to marry a gay couple is forcing them to break their religious code, and go against God and his command, you are essentially forcing someone to sin for your own self enjoyment.

        Yes, someone marrying gay people is the same as indirect support, and is as punishable by God as if you’d married the same sex yourself. Gay marriage is desensitizing humanity into believing this written sin is okay and should be brought into society with our children, who will grow up supporting something they shouldn’t, you are helping pave the way to hell for you and our next generations.

        What makes it even more obvious that you people have a lack of morals is the way you bash God as something that is a fairy tail, putting down religious, honest people and their beliefs and force your sickness on them. It’s disgusting, you’re polluting the media and the minds of many, God is angry indeed, heathens will burn the hottest.

        1. god is a lie2 years ago

          I strongly doubt any gay couple wanting to get married will force any church into marrying them. Why would they? There are plenty of secular avenues to get married by. As for your opinion on what you think of gay people, that’s your opinion. Keep it to yourself.

          1. Sutton2 years ago

            Well, you certainly have not been following the LGBT movement if you think they aren’t all about pushing for more and more ground. They have an agenda and target Christians with law suits,(bakeries, wedding chapels, etc.) They are more hateful than any group I have ever seen. They persecute anyone who doesn’t go along with their beliefs.

    6. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

      Let me take this discussion back to where it really belongs, which is in MY house and MY church…..

      Marriage is sacred and was ordained of God from before the foundation of the world. [1] Jesus Christ affirmed the divine origins of marriage…”[2] This tells me that God started marriage long before the government ever thought of “regulating” it, or charging a fee for it. Therefore, William, Robin, and Patricia, what gives any government (state, local, federal) the right to say anything about who can or can’t or shouldn’t or insn’t smart enough, or good looking enough, or qualified, or [insert your favorite phrase here]. This whole issue of marriage is really only a matter between God and the couple!!! So William, when your government gets out of my house and my church in relation to marriage, there will be no God in your government other than the one in the hearts of the elected officials. Robin, how have you and other “religious” people allowed the “wicked” to take over the government to the point where they are now trying to erase any and all references to God, country, loyalty, and common sense? Patricia, if the scotus were doing their job of following the constitutional law, instead of scrapping and rewriting it, then their noses would not be in this issue. The states and the scotus have no more right to talk of marriage than the feds, which is: NONE!!

      1. Alison2 years ago

        Actually, the government is staying out and of your house and your church on this one. It’s not saying that a church has to perform a marriage or that you as an individual have to throw couples a wedding shower, it’s saying that the state, as a civil body, can’t discriminate against gays and lesbians when it comes to marriage.

        1. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

          You missed the entire point of my statement ” which is in MY house and MY church…..” ONLY my church and me, if I believe the church, have the right to decide what marriage is. The government cannot declare what marriage is! God and the church are the creators of a marriage. The government has NO say in the matter!

          You said “Actually, the government is staying out and of your house and your church on this one.” Bad sentence structure aside, the government has now declared itself higher than the church on the issue of same sex marriage. Therefore, it HAS inserted itself into church business. The government has also declared that you need to get their permission to marry! How is that not inserting itself into marriage???

          Finally, your statement “it’s saying that the state, as a civil body, can’t discriminate”. Yes, it is now a federal law to not discriminate. This year the state can’t do it, but wait and some individual will, again, be sued, and a religious person’s right to follow their beliefs will be crushed/discriminated against.

          Your statement “or that you as an individual have to throw couples a wedding shower,” shows a lack of understanding, because the government HAS declared in at least two cases that YOU MUST bake a cake or take those photos! How is that not government inserting itself into my life or church? They now say that I cannot choose to NOT perform a service I feel violates the laws of God, because it is “discriminatory.” In so doing, are they not violating my right to run my business based on my religious beliefs? Where was YOUR outrage when the government told the American Indians they could not use peyote in their religious ceremonies? How is that not an example of government inserting itself into religions/churches?

          This whole thing is a great example of Americans telling God that they do not care what He wants, because they want to do it their way, not His!

          1. Mike2 years ago

            “which is in MY house and MY church…..” ONLY my church and me, if I believe the church, have the right to decide what marriage is.”

            Your welcome to your opinions. But that doesn’t make you right, and you are not right. The first amendment and all that. Americans sure do love to wave the flag and constitution, as long as the constitution says what they want it to say. When the ruling goes against them, then they pick up the Bible.
            When it comes to the government, the constitution is holy and sacred and the Bible means nothing.

            By the way, the Bible was written by man. The New Testament was written long after Christ was dead. The Gospels were written generations after Christ was dead. Pretty much all Biblical scholars realize the New Testament was passed down orally then written down by barely literate people. The Church collected all the various books and texts and copies and then voted on what should go in it. That is why there are so many extra non canon books.

            It has been changed and rewritten over and over by monks and Christians who wanted to push a particular view.
            It’s silly to pretend it’s God’s word when it was obviously written by man, voted on by man. It has no more to do with God than does The Hobbit or the Harry Potter books do.

            That is why no one should base their morality on the Bible. That and it’s a horrible book to base one’s morality on.
            As for defining marriage, the government does that, and the government is subject to the US constitution.
            You may of heard of it. It too was written by man.

      2. john ob2 years ago

        Marriage is a legal contract between consenting adults… your church has NOTHING to do with marriage… get over it….

        1. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

          “Marriage is a legal contract between consenting adults… your church has NOTHING to do with marriage… get over it….”

          Yes it is a contract of fidelity between adults, and has been for thousands of years. Only recently, however, has the world become so unbelieving that they totally have forgotten who performed the first marriage, and declared it’s purpose. That belief was that basis for basic society and human behavior for thousands of years. But, now we are so smart as a people that we can tell God to buzz off?? History is full of states, nations, and countries that have declined and fallen when they become smarter than God.

        2. Sutton2 years ago

          In the case of the Christian bakery that declined to bake a cake for a same sex couple and is now being sued for 135k, they served these folks on many other occasions but declined to make their wedding cake because it went against their religious convictions. Do you think they should be forced to participate in something they don’t believe in? Should a black baker have to bake a KKK cake. It isn’t like this couple couldn’t go to another bakery. Why can’t they have tolerance for the Christians views? Everyone has rights except the Christians. They were not being hateful at all. It seems like if you disagree with someone’s view or opinion you are automatically called a bigot or hateful. Sad day we are living in. Political correctness is killing our once free nation.

    7. Sydney2 years ago

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” Great. I strongly support the right of religious people to exercise their religions in their churches and homes. But religious people do not have the right to impose their religions on customers who come into their open to the public businesses or in governmental policy.

      1. Larry T. Rigdon2 years ago


        Don’t you remember the sign – No Shoes, No Shirt, No Service.

        Can’t you find plenty of non-Christian Businesses to provide services to the LGBT Community. The LGBT folks that I know are all rather successful and prosperous.

        Seem that your real goal is the same as most of the radical LGBT Community.

        Tolerate no act by any person that does not fully and completely accept homosexuality regardless of religious beliefs.

    8. LGMike2 years ago

      I assume you are talking about ISLAM which does not allow freedom of any sort if it goes against the Koran, or should I say, the ruling religious sect. Ask any women how they are given “every protection given a man”.

    9. Octavius Anthropas2 years ago

      William – I don’t want YOUR god in my government either. There is no such thing as government neutrality. It is pure mythology. SCOTUS has one again taken sides in a culture war in which it cannot resolve.

      And by the way, this issue can be argued against without an appeal to religious faith. For one, the “institution” of homosexual relations is itself contrary to the natural order of life, without appeal to a transcendent Creator.

      Once again, as it did with the abortion debate, SCOTUS has ensured that, while their ruling will no doubt be legally observed, it will never be accepted by a very large block of the citizenry. Which is the very reason that advocates for gay marriage should be worried by this ruling. Once again activists, with the help of SCOTUS, have circumvented the constitutional order of the nation by stifling debate allowing the people through their elected representatives to decide this issue.

      There is nothing encouraging about with this ruling. It will do nothing more than ensure the continued Balkanization of this nation. There is is no common thread holding this nation together. Ours is the fate of those that fell before us. No doubt we will meander along for a while long but we will not last. Not just because of this issue but because of the cumulative effect of these types of rulings and continued polarizing affect that this has on the nation.

  55. jason2 years ago

    You’re all a bunch of closed minded individuals. What have gay individuals done to any of you that really impacts you? Get over it because WE WON

    1. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

      Jason, are you saying that anyone who believes there is a God, and that He has a fixed standard of behavior is “closed minded”?

      Were your parents “closed minded” when they told you to “be a good boy and obey the rules?” Was your teacher “closed minded” when he/she told “you that the only way to learn this material is by studying and practicing it?” I am sorry to hear you are upset with God’s rules, but unless you believe completely and wholly in accidental evolution and your relationship to the apes, there is no way to escape God’s rules. You can rant and rave and call people names all you want, but there are some rules that are fixed and cannot be changed. Quoting memyself: “… regardless of Governments and man made laws … God created this world and therefore it’s his.”

    2. sharon2 years ago

      We won!!! That’s all that matters. If we waited for everyone to be on board with innovative, ethical ideas we’d never get anything done. It’s a great day.

      1. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

        “Tolerate no act by any person that does not fully and completely accept homosexuality regardless of religious beliefs.” I agree completely!!!

        Is that also not the same thinking that a certain radical religious group from the middle east is using to take over countries and slaughter Christians????

        Then there is my favorite example of a corrupt church in the period of 300AD to 1600AD in Europe that committed theft, genocide, murder, and torture of people who disagreed with them. Before you get mad at me for pointing out the facts, google cathar genocide, inquisition, Galileo, Capernicus, and more.

        What we are seeing here in the scotus decision is exactly the same thing!! Someone got offended and plotted revenge by getting the government involved in an issue that was none of the government’s business!!!!!

        The institution of marriage was common in the time of the founders, but there was not a word said about the government having the right to regulate, control, or tax it with a license. Why?? Because it was a church issue, and not a state or government matter!

      2. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

        Oh hallelujah!!!! A fixed morality and thousands of years of accepted behavior have now been thrown in the trash, so let us parteee!!!

        “innovative, ethical ideas” – Now breaking God’s laws is “innovative”? You are also redefining what is “ethical”? I can hear the discussion in the future between a child and a parent. Yes dear, there was a time when a few religious nuts said that same sex marriage was against the rules of god. We are so much more “enlightened” as a society, because we do not believe in that sort of religious myth structure. After all, we know we are just a product of chance and your uncle the monkey should be honored.

  56. Susannah Lee Myers2 years ago

    “Virtually everyone agrees that the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution offers some protections for religious groups.”

    Gee, that’s broad-minded of them.

  57. Patricia2 years ago

    I can’t believe the Supreme Court is even talking about same sex marriages. That should be left to the states to decide. The people have a right in each state to be heard. I just hope they read the bible and are Christians .

    1. George Olds2 years ago

      “States’ rights” was never anything but the rallying-call of the prejudiced.

      Prejudice is heinous enough on its own, but when it’s religion-induced, it’s corrosive to a civilized society.

      1. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

        “States’ rights” is what???
        I am baffled as to where that statement came from! The issue was whether the national government would have more power than the states in matters of governance. King George was a major factor in the designers of the constitution putting checks and balances (3 branches) in place to avoid the national government from having more power. Hence, the government had a few specific rights given to it, and the rest were given to the states. Try reading the papers of the founders and you will find how false your statement is!

    2. Alison2 years ago

      Just to be clear, LOTS of people who support gay marriage-and this particular ruling–are Christian and do read the Bible. You might not agree with us, but obviously it’s impossible to know which “brand” of Christianity is right.

  58. Bob Gaston2 years ago

    Our liberal/progressive friends have told us that gay marriage would have no legal impact on our religious life at all. Do you mean to say they have been lying to us all this time?

    1. George Olds2 years ago

      No religion will ever be forced to marry … ANY couple contrary to its tenets.

      No clergy person will ever be forced to marry … ANY couple contrary to his/her beliefs.

      Sorry, but selling cakes and flowers to the public for profit is NOT a religious exercise.

      1. Will2 years ago

        As a business owner you reserve the right to deny service to anyone at anytime for any reason, religious beliefs or not.

        1. Will Not2 years ago

          As a business owner, try denying service to someone based on race, color, religion, national origin or disability. See how far you get.

          Religious beliefs or not.

          You can’t “reserve the right” to discriminate — even if you put up a sign saying you do.

        2. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

          Sorry bro, that was in the parts of the constitution that actually allowed you to follow the dictates of your own conscience while pursuing your happiness. It has been replaced by all the laws written to take away those kinds of freedoms once honored in the constitution.

  59. Richard P Sheridan2 years ago

    Gay marriage is against Gods law. Our Nation is becoming morally degenerate, as is prophetized in the Bible. If the Bible doesnt matter anymore, we are a damned Nation.

    There are plenty of examples in the Bible where GOD punished His people for violating His laws. Today, it seems that man is smarter than God.

    1. monica2 years ago

      so is wearing gold, cotton poly blend clothes and eating shellfish.

    2. George Olds2 years ago

      Re: “Gay marriage is against Gods [sic] laws.”

      Too bad America is not a theocracy or you might have had a relevant point.

      The issue is CIVIL marriage. It’s NOT a ‘God-thing’.

      1. Will2 years ago

        This country was founded and built by God fearing anf following people. God is in the Declaration or independence, the constitution, in the pledge of allegiance, it says in God we trust on our currency. Marriage is a sacred union between one woman and one man. Anything else is a sin and of Satan. That’s not an opinion it’s biblical fact. If you choose to ignore our Lord word that’s on you. I won’t force my beliefs on anyone but it’s my charge to inform all on the correct path and leave it to them to follow it or not.

      2. memyself2 years ago

        Well, for those gay or not that believe in God must believe that regardless of Governments and man made laws that God created this world and therefore it’s his. At some time He will make it known. If you read the bible then you know this is part of revelations. It doesn’t make it right just because 5 or 9 judges say it is. Prostitution is legal in NV and sex with minors is OK in other countries. Does that make it right? This only confirms my testimony of the bible because it’s proof that it’s true. The revelations are coming to pass which means the U.S. will continue to suffer. there’s no win here. If a person wants to marry their dog should they? Why not, it doesn’t hurt you. How about plural marriage, As long as it’s consenting adults it’s not hurting you right?

        1. rose2 years ago


          1. robert2 years ago

            If you want a theocracy give up your US citizenship and move to Iran. Native Americans never asked for their land and culture to be subsumed, which was done in the name of “manifest destiny and religion”. You’re entitled to your religious beliefs, which our constitution affords you. Just don’t foist it upon those who don’t think like you. It’s about civil rights NOT morality! I feel so blessed to live in a country where issues like this can be debated and settled. Time to put this issue to bed and move on.

        2. Jennifer2 years ago

          It is so hard to see our lack of moral conscience. Nothing is wrong, nothing is good, it so depend on… For example: It will be good or bad marriages of three or five people?, or marriage with minors?… Relativity of morality will affect us, everyone is going to be affected, specially our children and next generations. God forgive us.

      3. tonka2 years ago

        If we change what marriage is between a man and women, can’t be changed again, like three people getting married? Does this open up a variety of options for what marriage is and yes think about extremes.

    3. Gloria Billings2 years ago

      Gay marriage is not sinful, even in the context of Christian faith. True that people have interpreted homosexual behavior to be abominable because some ancient Jewish laws stated that. The culture was far different at that time and we don’t abide by those old Jewish laws any more. If you’re interested, read the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament and you’ll see some pretty outrageous stuff. In any event, those were not God’s laws, they were Jewish laws. Otherwise, the Ten Commandments are about the only thing we can see as God’s laws. The rest of the Bible was written by guys, not dictated by God to be written as it was. Even with all this, any religious organization can select which couple they will marry. That might be a rule that couples must be opposite sex or that the couple has not been living together or that the couple are “born again,” or any other restriction. The Supreme Court decision June 26 does not interfere with that, just state laws.

      1. Paul Wheeler2 years ago

        I believe that your position is called “cafeteria’ religion. Take what you like and ignore the rest!

        So, you really think that the only relevant thing in the bible are “the Ten Commandments?” That would make a much easier to carry bible!! Forget what the prophets said or did, because we only need 10 statements.

    4. Rose2 years ago

      Finally someone understands! Amen to that!! 🙂
      Gay marriage is not God’s plan. Gay people are fine wonderful people, but gay marriage is wrong.

      1. Anonymous1 year ago

        I am doing a 8 page assignment for my history class about how the law for same sex-marriage would affect are next generation. I full believe that yes this is not gods plan but why in the new testament Romans 1:26-27 would it state: “for even their women did change that natural use into that which is against nature: and likewise also the men,learning the natural use of the women, burned in their luster on towered another;men with men working that which is an seemly, and receiving in them selves that recompense of their error which was meet” these things where mentioned to happen it is changing for the lives of many children now and for the next generation. We as humans question what was once set in stone but what was once set in stone is know coming to be. So how do we come to stand buy what we believe? We let it happen even if we fully don’t agree with what is happening we have to leave it in God’s hands and trust he has a greater plane for god gives his people the storm before the clean earth the rain before the rainbow. Let God gid you and believe in him he will make things good again because God is god all the time and all the time god is god so amen.

    5. LaTasha2 years ago


  60. Linda Zambanini2 years ago

    I wish mainstream sources like Pew the AP and others would please stop quoting Robin Fretwell Wilson as a neutral “religious liberty” expert! She and her group of like-minded religious, “neutral” liberty advocates worked with the extremist, anti-gay, anti-gay marriage hate group Alliance Defense Fund (ADF – now the Alliance Defending Freedom) to pass SB 1062 – which even batshit crazy Gov. Jan Brewer wisely vetoed! She and her group wrote to Republican legislators in the Indiana General Assembly in support of broadly written SB 101 – Mike Pence’s “right to discriminate bill” that was put together with the lobbying and help of extremist anti-gay HATE groups like Advance America, Indiana Family Institute (IFI), American Family Association of Indiana etc…)! And oh, so much more (detailed below). Her much praised Utah “compromise” she loves to tout, threw Gay people under the bus. Yes, even some LGBT groups and individuals supported it, only because living for years in oppressive Mormon controlled Utah with no hope and with no protections whatsoever, enduring lifetimes of Mormon bigotry, they were willing to accept a few crumbs of rights at the expense of leaving massive carve-outs for Mormon anti-gay discrimination. The definition of Stockholm Syndrome.

    It’s time you got the details on this disingenuous and dangerous woman before you cite her as an innocuous, neutral expert again. Please treat *anything* Robin Fretwell Wilson writes as suspect. Most of the members of the “neutral” groups of “religious liberty” experts she has worked with have fundamentalist/orthodox Catholic connections to anti-gay groups like the Beckett Foundation etc…and even the Vatican itself. I looked into many of them once i found out how disingenuous and mendacious she was.

    So who exactly is Robin Fretwell Wilson?

    She’s a wolf in sheep’s clothing! She (currently) *purports* to be a supporter of SSM but repeatedly advocates for broadly written RFRAs that would allow discrimination against LGBT people with impunity.
    She’s part of an allegedly “neutral” group of law professors that wrote and signed letters to Republican lawmakers supporting AZ’s SB 1062 and Indiana’s SB 101, stating that these laws are harmless! (The AZ letter was written at the behest of the virulently anti-gay Alliance Defense Fund, now known as the Alliance Defending Freedom. So they are not “neutral”!) She’s been a member of other anti-gay groups along with NOM’s Maggie Gallagher too. (Details on this below).

    Some of the other law professors in her group also *purport* to be supporters of LGBT rights and marriage equality, but I just don’t buy it. In repeated news articles and advocacy letters to Republican state legislators, they have disingenuously and repeatedly withheld key information from lawmakers and the public about the breadth, context and potential damage of these RFRA bills – misleading lawmakers and the public about their potential impact – and intent. The oft-quoted scholars of “religious liberty law” who are self-described supporters of marriage equality and LGBT rights, and thus allegedly neutral, are: Prof. Douglas Laycock, Univ. of Va. Law School, Prof. Robin Fretwell Wilson, Univ. of Illinois Law School, and Prof. Daniel O. Conkle, IU Law School, (and some others in this group) which have written letters in support of these expansive, discriminatory RFRAs. A bunch of have orthodox Catholic ties and teach at Catholic colleges – or even have direct ties to the Vatican. One of the most well-known books she’s co-edited, “Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty: Emerging Conflicts” she co-edited with Anthony J. Picarello, who is general counsel for the anti-gay United States Conference of Catholic Bishops in Washington, D.C. and he was Vice President and General Counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty (an anti-gay orthodox Catholic “religious liberty” group). The other Vatican connection in addition to Picarello, was one of the co-signers with Wilson of the letter to the Indiana Republican legislators supporting the expansive and hateful Indiana RFRA (SB 101) this spring: Mary Ann Glendon. Glendon, is an orthodox Catholic (and anti-abortion, anti-SSM), who was appointed Ambassador to the Holy See by George W Bush. The Pope later appointed her the Pontifical Commission of inquiry for the Institute for Works of Religion (IOR), aka: The Vatican Bank. Glendon, two cardinals, a bishop, and a monsignor are responsible for preparing an investigative report on the Vatican Bank.In July 2014 she was appointed to be a member of the board of the IOR. This just demonstrates the powerful, non-neutral, anti-gay connections and intent of the “religious liberty” groups Fretwell Wilson has associated herself with.
    Newpapers and media outlets – including in more liberal outlets like The Atlantic, Slate, Salon, Huffpo, WaPo, USA Today etc…keep publishing and quoting members of this same group of law professors as supposedly neutral “religious liberty law experts” who allegedly “support same-sex marriage.”

    Robin Fretwell Wilson also infamously helped draft the “Utah Compromise” with massive carve-outs allowing discrimination against LGBT people. She said in her 108 pg essay “Marriage of Necessity: Same-Sex Marriage and Religious Liberty Protections”:

    “…in the tougher political terrain that looms, those who care about marriage equality can continue to sew up legislative victories—but the price tag in the short term will be to agree to robust religious liberty protections for dissenters. Those who wish to protect religious objectors from the unintended consequences of same-sex marriage *should act with all deliberate speed* to lock in robust religious liberty protections, because the window for securing them is almost certainly closing.”

    She then conveniently includes a table in that essay showing which states have included LGBT people in their state Civil Rights Acts, so that religious freedom advocates will know which states Gay people are protected in – and in which they’re not. The latter would be the states to target asap, IOW, so that Gays can be discriminated against in the public sphere with legal impunity.

    Articles about Robin Fretwell Wilson:

    The Religious Right Operative Who Helped Write Utah’s Nondiscrimination Law –
    “Was the nondiscrimination/religious freedom law in Utah really the “historic compromise” it’s being touted as, or a Trojan Horse for the Religious Right’s agenda? There now seems to be little doubt with the discovery that one of the law’s authors [Robin Fretwell Wilson] has spent years working with the country’s most prominent Religious Right leaders and groups to advance right-to-discriminate laws across the country….”

    Author of Utah LGBT Rights Law [Robin Fretwell Wilson] Has Deep Ties to Anti-LGBT Right Wingers

    Furthermore – and this episode is really slimy – in 2009, Wilson, who *purports* to be a supporter of LGBT rights and marriage equality, testified before a D.C. Council hearing on gay marriage and also wrote a Washington Post op-ed advocating for stronger protections for “religious liberty” and “religious objectors”. (Just prior to this it was documented that she was NOT a supporter of SSM. Personally, given her and her group’s repeated deceptions and misrepresentations in the letters to the Indiana and Arizona legislatures supporting SB 101 and SB 1062, and shocking legal misrepresentations to the DC City Council, and revelations unearthed by DC councilmember, David Catania, I feel she is making up her SSM support in an attempt to be more convincing to the public that these RFRA’s are harmless). In her council testimony, Wilson cited a flurry of federal case law stating that the cases demonstrated the courts ruled in favor of public businesses and public servants (including police officers!) being allowed to deny services to Gay people based upon their religious beliefs!

    One of the Councilmembers, David Catania, found the case law she cited to be so fishy, he proceeded to actually look up the cases, finding she had *willfully misrepresented* these cases to the Council to support “religious liberty” carve outs for LGBT people.

    Catania also discovered Robin Fretwell Wilson was a member of the Virginia Marriage Commission – an organ of the Family Foundation of Virginia whose stated goal is to promote the ideal that marriage “is the union between one man and one woman, [and] is an institution of God and the foundation of civil society.” One of the nation’s most virulent anti-gay, marriage equality opponents, Maggie Gallagher, was one of her colleagues at the Foundation. And the Foundation’s partners are other well-known right-wing virulently anti-gay, marriage equality opponents: The Family Research Council (an SPLC hate group), Focus on the Family, and the Alliance Defense Fund (now known as the Alliance Defending Freedom). Quelle surprise! She instead represented herself as a neutral “religious freedom” expert who supported SSM! He was so incensed at her mendacity, legal misrepresentations and failure to disclose her connections to groups that were virulently anti-gay marriage equality opponents, that he proceeded to write Washington & Lee University School of Law (her employer at that time) and the Chief Disciplinary Counsel of the State Bar to report her unethical conduct. Robin Fretwell Wilson has no shame and will stop at nothing to deny civil rights protections to LGBT people.

    David Catania Smacks Down Anti-Gay-Marriage Law Prof