Please disable your Ad Blocker to better interact with this website.

shutterstock_254229670

What Would Civil Disobedience Look Like?

Faith and Freedom with Liberty Counsel’s Mat Staver and BarbWire’s Matt Barber…

An 11-minute weekday radio program discussing hot topics in the area of religious liberty, the sanctity of human life and the family.

Leaders of a variety of religious persuasions have come together not only to sign a marriage pledge, but also to sign an open letter to the justices of the United States Supreme Court.

And in this open letter, they say, collectively, they are united…we are united on the matter of marriage and a line we cannot cross is one in which the Supreme Court or any other court, would attempt to redefine marriage as anything other than the union of one man and one woman.

The questions is, what will be the option for the Supreme Court and what does civil disobedience look like if the court goes the wrong way?

Mat Staver: Matt, let’s first of all look at the options of the Supreme Court…whether they’re legitimate or not. Let’s just look at what the possible outcomes of the Supreme Court could be. And one would be that the Supreme Court would have a majority of Justices that say that there’s a constitutional right to same sex marriage.

In other words, you have a right to same sex marriage and, consequently, states do not have a right to limit marriage to the natural creative order of one man – one woman.

That’s one option — that’s the worse case scenario. The other option is that there is no constitutional right to same sex marriage, it’s up to the states…

Matt Barber: Mat, Justice Anthony Kennedy is largely regarded and expected to be the swing vote in this case, and if he’s going to remain consistent…now, the Windsor decision found part of the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional.

The Windsor decision was a horrific decision, but at least in the decision he, Justice Kennedy, and we’ll disagree with this, but he said effectively, he argued from a federalist standpoint, saying that this is really a state’s rights issue, that the states have the purview, the right to define marriage. And we, of course, agree with that. 

However, if Justice Kennedy is going to remain consistent, and not contradict himself and the opinion that he wrote in Windsor, he’ll have to come down on the side of the states here…

Regrettably, we now know that on Friday Justice Kennedy ended up contradicting himself in Windsor, as well as contradicting God.



 

Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse.

Trending Now on BarbWire.com

Send this to a friend