Twitter icon

Facebook icon

About this site
About us
Our beliefs
Is this your first visit?
Contact us
External links

Recommended books

Visitors' essays
Our forum
New essays
Other features
Buy a CD of this site
Vital notes

World religions
Christian def'n
 Shared beliefs
 Handling change
 Bible topics
 Bible inerrancy
 Bible harmony
 Interpret the Bible
 Beliefs & creeds
 Da Vinci code
 Revelation 666
Other religions
Cults and NRMs
Comparing Religions

Non-theistic beliefs

About all religions
Main topics
Basic information
Gods & Goddesses
Handling change
Doubt & security
Confusing terms
End of the World?
True religion?
Seasonal events
Science vs. Religion
More information

Morality & ethics
Absolute truth

Attaining peace
Religious tolerance
Religious freedom
Religious hatred
Religious conflict
Religious violence

"Hot" topics
Very hot topics
Ten Commandments
Abortion access
Assisted suicide
Death penalty

Same-sex marriage

Human rights
Gays in the military
Sex & gender
Stem cells
Other topics

Laws and news
Religious laws
Religious news



Religious Tolerance logo

Religious freedom to discriminate and denigrate:

Part 2 of 3:
2015-JUL: Conservative Christian leaders issue
statements opposing the gay marriage decision
of the U.S. Supreme Court during 2015-JUN.
Rebuttals included.

horizontal line

This topic is a continuation from the previous essay.

horizontal line

A press conference by conservative Christian groups opposing the High Court ruling:

On 2015-JUL-01, representatives of eleven conservative Christian groups held a press conference on the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court. All were critical of the recent decision by that court in Obergefell v. Hodges. That ruling legalized same-sex marriage across the United States.

horizontal rule

Quotes from the Press Conference (Continued):

  • 4. Michael Hichborn, president and founder of the Lepanto Institute:

    “Last week, the Supreme Court dealt a terrible blow to the Constitutional protection of the free practice of religion. There are already cases all over the country of businesses being sued or being forced to close down in states that recognize same - sex so-called ‘marriage,’ because they refuse to provide services for ceremonies that violate their religious beliefs.

    We are about to witness an explosion of such cases, but it won’t stop there. Same - sex couples will soon be knocking on the doors of Catholic Churches and Cathedrals, demanding that priests, bishops, and cardinals commit sacrilege by blasphemously conducting ceremonies mocking the institution of marriage its self.

    The Supreme Court has declared war against every Christian in America.”


Freedom of religious speech, assembly, proselytizing, etc has not been impacted. The freedom of clergy to refuse to marry same-sex couples has not changed. The only impact on the freedom of religion is in some states and cities that have human rights legislation that requires public accommodations to serve all customer, regardless of their skin color, gender, religion, etc. Some of these laws cover sexual orientation as a protected class.

An "explosion of such cases" is unlikely. Prior to the court decision, 37 states allowed same-sex marriage. After the decision, this number increased by only 13. Before the ruling, 72% of Americans lived in areas where same-sex marriages were available. This increased by only 28%.

horizontal rule

Sponsored link:

horizontal rule

  • 5. Hugh Brown, a board member at American Life League.

“As Catholics, as Christians, we have practiced our faith for two thousands years. Marriage is defined by God as the union of a man and a woman. It is unchanging. It is an absolute. The whims and decisions of men and women who have abandoned reason who have abandoned common sense and decency does not change the truth of what marriage is.”


The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution erected a "wall of separation" between church and state. This means that churches, synagogues, mosques, etc. are free to define marriage as they wish. But the marriage laws written by individual states must follow the federal Constitution. The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the Constitution's 14th Amendment requires that same-sex couples be allowed to marry if they meet the same restrictions on age, consanguinity, etc. that are required of opposite-sex couples. Religious freedom works in multiple ways, for religious conservatives, religious liberals, and secularists.

It can be argued on the basis of reason and scientific investigations that humans are social animals; they seek to partner with an individual with whom they feel a sexual attraction. This applies to persons of all sexual orientation: heterosexual, homosexual and bisexual. A percentage of persons of all sexual orientations will develop a sincere and committed bond with another person, and will want to marry their partner. Many would feel that this option uses reason & common sense, and is decent.

horizontal rule

Some leaders of other conservative Christian groups were not present at the press conference, but provided statements opposing marriage equality:

  • 6. Bob Laird, Vice President for Program Development and the Director of Higher Education Programs for The Cardinal Newman Society:

“While Five Supreme Court justices may have changed the legal status of same - sex marriage under the law, they have not and cannot change the
essence and meaning of marriage as understood by every society in the history of man.

Our Catholic schools will not concede their rights to the truth about marriage. Regardless of discrimination or government coercion, faithful Catholics must continue to teach the Truth. It is our right as Americans, and our duty as Catholics.”


Some societies around the world and throughout time have legalized marriage equality for same-sex couples. Today, in the U.S., in excess of 60% of adults favor the legalization of gay marriage.

Catholic schools remain free to define what marriage should mean as they wish. However, if they are going to teach about the actual situation in the United States and in almost all other English speaking countries, then they will have to discuss that gay marriage is the law of the land.


  • 7. John Hawkins, founder of Right Wing News:

" As Antonin Scalia noted in his dissent, the Supreme Court's ruling on gay marriage had nothing with the U.S. Constitution. Instead, five Supreme Court Justices substituted their own opinion for that of more than 300 million people. No American who cares about the Constitution, justice, or the rule of law could support this ruling.

Since when do Christians lose their First Amendment rights if they start a business? Since when does “freedom of religion” only apply as long as you don’t own a bakery or take wedding photos? This is a country founded on religious freedom, and those rights don’t cease the moment someone walks out of doors of their church. The
time to start fighting back is right here and now.

horizontal rule

Sponsored link:

horizontal rule

  • 8. Dr. Jennifer Robac Morse, founder of the Ruth Institute:

“The Obergefell decision tacitly declares that invented rights of adults take precedence over natural rights of children. The policy of the United States government will henceforth be to take sides with ‘intended parents’ in disputes with natural parents, and against the legitimate interests of children to their own genetic and cultural heritage. The Supreme Court has surreptitiously redefined parenthood as a side effect of redefining marriage. This ruling shamefully robs children of equal protection under the law.

The majority of the Court sidesteps these inevitable logical consequences of their decision.

While we are appalled by this decision, we commend the courage and good sense of Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito. These far-sighted men affirm that each State may make its own policy with respect to the definition of marriage. In so doing, they stand up for the rights of children to know their own parents, and the rights of the people of the States to govern themselves.”


Most of the Justices on the court do not regard the rights of couples to marry to be invented. They are a fundamental right and can be denied only for very good reasons, such as being to young or too closely related.

horizontal line

This topic continues in the next essay.

horizontal line

References used:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.

  1. "Religious and cultural leaders: Supreme Court marriage decision imperils religious liberty, undermines Constitution," Life Site News, 2015-JUL-01, at:
  2. "Quotes from Press Conference," 2015-JUL-01, at:

horizontal line

How you may have arrived here:

Home > Religious info. > Basic > Marriage > Same-sex marriage> same-sex marriage sub-menu > Kentucky > Supreme Court > here

horizontal line

Copyrights held by the ten speakers.
Original posting: 2015-AUG-24
Latest update : 2015-AUG-24
Complied by: B.A. Robinson
Rebuttals by: B.A. Robinson

line.gif (538 bytes)
horizontal rule

Go to the previous page, or to the "Supreme Court accepts appeals from 4 states" menu, or choose:


Go to home page  We would really appreciate your help

E-mail us about errors, etc.  Hot, controversial topics

FreeFind search, lists of new essays...  Having problems printing our essays?

Twitter link

Facebook icon

Google Page Translator:

This page translator works on Firefox,
Opera, Chrome, and Safari browsers only

After translating, click on the "show
original" button at the top of this
page to restore page to English.

Sponsored links