The Federal Marriage Ammendment; Churches and the Right to Political Speech
It's been about a week or so since the Senate voted on a montion for cloture to bring about the Marriage Protection Act. For those that don't know, it didn't get the 60 votes needed to end debate, meaning that it would have never gotten the 67 required to pass in the Senate (as something that is desired to have become a constitutional ammendment requires a solid 2/3 vote.
Had it passed it would have had to achieve the same in the House (which I suspect would have been easier, as there are more conservatives in the house and less RINO's - Republican's in Name Only). After that it would have had to pass under the same requirements in 75% of the states - either through the legislature or at the ballot box.
A tough job indeed, yet highlighting how important and final ammendments to the United States Constitution really are.
While the lines on this issue are pretty clear, and supporters are legion on both sides, it is something that I truly believe that the country needs.
It's been shown through various social science and sociological studies that for a child to have the best chance to grow up healthy, a crucial issue that that the child have both parents, a mother and a father. Children that do not have that are more likely to become deviant and not grow up to become good citizens of the great nation within which they reside.
Not only that, but religious liberty, one of the highest aspirations of the US Constitution is at stake as well. In a great article that was published a few weeks back in the Weekly Standard, Maggie Ghallagher discussed this in the context of Catholic Charlities of Boston having to pull out of the adoption business because they would not allow same-sex couples to adopt children who they cared for prior to adoption, for one simple reason - the Catholic Church forbid it. Hence, they had to drop out of the business or risk violating the law in Massachusetts.
If this can happen, being only the beginning, in the name of freedom of sexaual orientation and "equal rights", what's next; pastors getting punished for speaking out against such things because it is against what they believe? It's considered punishable "hate speech" in Canada to speak out against homosexauality from behind a pulpit. Would that happen here? It could.
Not only that, but there is a bill floating around the House right now that would protect churches from losing their 501-c3 status as tax exempt organizations if they were to speak out on a political issue. This is a GOOD thing, something in direct connection to what I mentioned above about Canada, but going the RIGHT direction, and not the direction Canada has gone. There are some out there that have not forgotten that some of the greatest statesmen in our country were once clergy; thank God for those that have not forgotten.
Had it passed it would have had to achieve the same in the House (which I suspect would have been easier, as there are more conservatives in the house and less RINO's - Republican's in Name Only). After that it would have had to pass under the same requirements in 75% of the states - either through the legislature or at the ballot box.
A tough job indeed, yet highlighting how important and final ammendments to the United States Constitution really are.
While the lines on this issue are pretty clear, and supporters are legion on both sides, it is something that I truly believe that the country needs.
It's been shown through various social science and sociological studies that for a child to have the best chance to grow up healthy, a crucial issue that that the child have both parents, a mother and a father. Children that do not have that are more likely to become deviant and not grow up to become good citizens of the great nation within which they reside.
Not only that, but religious liberty, one of the highest aspirations of the US Constitution is at stake as well. In a great article that was published a few weeks back in the Weekly Standard, Maggie Ghallagher discussed this in the context of Catholic Charlities of Boston having to pull out of the adoption business because they would not allow same-sex couples to adopt children who they cared for prior to adoption, for one simple reason - the Catholic Church forbid it. Hence, they had to drop out of the business or risk violating the law in Massachusetts.
If this can happen, being only the beginning, in the name of freedom of sexaual orientation and "equal rights", what's next; pastors getting punished for speaking out against such things because it is against what they believe? It's considered punishable "hate speech" in Canada to speak out against homosexauality from behind a pulpit. Would that happen here? It could.
Not only that, but there is a bill floating around the House right now that would protect churches from losing their 501-c3 status as tax exempt organizations if they were to speak out on a political issue. This is a GOOD thing, something in direct connection to what I mentioned above about Canada, but going the RIGHT direction, and not the direction Canada has gone. There are some out there that have not forgotten that some of the greatest statesmen in our country were once clergy; thank God for those that have not forgotten.
posted by A. R. Welty at 7:30 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home