Alan F.H. Wisdom–Judge Walker's Prop 8 Ruling would make traditional believers enemies of the state

In a government that professes religious neutrality, these kinds of judicial attacks on named religious groups are extraordinary. One must ask: What business does a federal judge have declaring as a “finding of fact” that religious beliefs are harmful or beneficial to any group? Who is he to look into the hearts of religious believers and see only “stereotypes and misinformation”? Since when is a law held in suspicion simply because religious bodies endorsed it and churchgoers voted for it?

Roman Catholics, Southern Baptists, and others targeted by Judge Walker would give a different account of their motives. They affirm the unique status of the marriage of man and woman because they regard it as a blessing, not a harm, for all of society. They counsel people against all nonmarital sexual relations, heterosexual or homosexual, because marriage provides the best environment for both adults and children to flourish.

The judge offered reassurances that overturning Proposition 8 would not “affect the First Amendment rights of those opposed to marriage for same-sex couples.” He stressed a prior ruling that “no religious officiant will be required to solemnize a marriage in contravention of his or her religious beliefs.” But this has never been the principal threat.

The real threat impinges more upon traditionalist laypeople and parachurch organizations.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, --Civil Unions & Partnerships, Anthropology, Church/State Matters, Ethics / Moral Theology, Law & Legal Issues, Marriage & Family, Religion & Culture, Sexuality, Theology

2 comments on “Alan F.H. Wisdom–Judge Walker's Prop 8 Ruling would make traditional believers enemies of the state

  1. Chris Molter says:

    For the kind of state certain parties are striving to bring about, we Christians SHOULD be the enemy. If not, we’re no longer salt.

  2. deaconmark says:

    “The real threat impinges more upon traditionalist laypeople and parachurch organizations. ….It will affect many other areas, including hiring practices, employment benefits, education and counseling related to marriage, and marriage-related facilities and services.” And here is the real crux of the matter. Collect government tax money (with no scruples about the fact that some of it (much of it) comes from gay people, divorced people, never married in relationship people) but be exempt from any government regulation about who one servives or how one serves. Perhaps you really cannot serve two gods at one time? Do you think?