Supreme Court Marriage Decision Exemplifies Judicial Tyranny

Marriage, , ,

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Friday, June 26, 2015

Today the U.S. Supreme Court ruled states do not have the constitutional authority to define marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Family Council President Jerry Cox released a statement, saying, “Today’s ruling exemplifies judicial tyranny. Voters in more than three-fifths of the country democratically passed laws and amendments defining marriage in their respective states. Today’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling sends a very clear message that five unelected justices believe they have the power to disenfranchise fifty million American voters. It’s unthinkable.”

Cox said today’s ruling deepens divisions among Americans regarding marriage. “Unfortunately, this ruling does nothing to bring Americans willingly to any consensus on marriage. The court has offered its definition of marriage through this ruling, and that’s a definition tens of millions of voters still reject. This does not unite the nation. It further divides us.”

Cox said the court’s ruling is unprecedented. “The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled time and time again that the government has the power to define and regulate marriage. When it struck part of the federal Defense of Marriage Act in 2013, the court did so on the basis that marriage is something regulated by state government—not the federal government. Today the court has essentially said that state governments cannot regulate marriage, either. If the federal government cannot define or regulate marriage, and if state governments cannot define or regulate marriage, then tell me who can.”

Cox said today’s ruling calls into question the very meaning of marriage and family in America. “The question this ruling raises is ‘What is a marriage, and what is a family?’ If marriage can be between two men, why can’t it be between three or five? What is the logical argument for limiting it to just two people? We’re eliminating the very definition of marriage, and in so doing we are redefining the family as well.”

Cox said Family Council will work with attorneys and lawmakers to protect people of faith from discrimination as a result of today’s ruling. “Now that this ruling has been handed down, I believe a tidal wave of litigation is bound to unfold as gay activists try to force people of faith to violate their deeply-held religious convictions by aiding and participating in same-sex ceremonies in Arkansas and all across the country. We plan to work with our friends to ensure the freedoms of speech and religion are not squelched. One thing is for sure: This situation is far from over.”

###

READ MORE

Pulaski County Judge’s Marriage Ruling Comes as No Surprise

1 CommentMarriage,

Yesterday Circuit Judge Wendell Griffen issued a ruling validating same-sex marriages performed in Arkansas from May 9, 2014, to May 15, 2014.

In layman’s terms, the case has to do with a technicality from Judge Chris Piazza’s same-sex marriage ruling issued on May 9, 2014; in his ruling, Judge Piazza struck Arkansas’ constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman, but he failed to strike all state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.

Judge Piazza filed a “correction” to his ruling on May 15 striking those state laws as well. However, by then many same-sex couples had already obtained marriage licenses from the state; the State of Arkansas contends that same-sex marriages performed from May 9 to May 15 are invalid, because they were solemnized before Judge Piazza filed his “correction.”

Yesterday, Judge Wendell Griffen ruled the same-sex marriages performed from May 9 – 15, 2014, were in fact valid despite Judge Piazza’s failure to strike all applicable state laws related to same-sex marriage. While we–and Attorney General Leslie Rutledge–disagree with Judge Griffen’s ruling, it really comes as no surprise.

On May 12, 2014, Judge Wendell Griffen presided over at least one same-sex marriage in the rotunda of the Pulaski County Courthouse in Little Rock; pictures of Judge Griffen appeared in the news to prove it. At the time, Judge Griffen clearly believed same-sex marriage was legal in Arkansas, despite the fact some state laws prohibiting same-sex marriage had been left in place by Judge Piazza. In light of that, it’s really no surprise Judge Griffen ruled the way he did.

In fact, in his opinion handed down yesterday Judge Griffen actually went so far as to describe Judge Piazza’s 2014 ruling as “courageous and plainly stated.” If Judge Piazza’s 2014 ruling really was “plainly stated,” I wonder why Judge Piazza had to correct his ruling after the fact; why the Arkansas Supreme Court has taken so many months to review the ruling on appeal; and why addition litigation has been necessary to clarify whether or not the same-sex marriages performed in the immediate aftermath of Judge Piazza’s ruling were actually legal.

The larger questions surrounding same-sex marriage still rest with the Arkansas Supreme Court–which is reviewing an appeal of Judge Piazza’s 2014 ruling–and the U.S. Supreme Court, which is expected to hand down a decision on the constitutionality of state marriage laws sometime this month.

READ MORE

Why Churches Should Not Get Out of the “Marriage Business”

Marriage,

As judges continue to redefine marriage in spite of millenia of human history, religious tradition, and overwhelming majorities of voters, many Christians have called for churches and ministers to get out of the “marriage business” altogether.

The idea is as the legal definition of marriage has changed, ministers may be compromising their convictions by signing state-issued marriage licenses for Christian couples.

John Stonestreet at the Chuck Colson Center for Christian Worldview has authored an excellent commentary on why ministers should not get out of the “marriage business”–at least not yet.

Stonestreet writes,

“First of all, there’s nothing on a state marriage license that requires clergy to say that marriage is something that it is not. But by refusing to sign any marriage licenses, we’re missing an opportunity to proclaim to the state and to the public what marriage truly is.

“Second, by backing out of the civil marriage business, we risk perpetuating that illusion that marriage is something the government defines instead of something it recognizes, and we perpetuate the myth that the Christian view of marriage is only for us Christians. In fact, marriage existed before the church and before the state. It’s the job of both institutions to recognize it.

“And here’s a question that bothers me. If clergy should not participate in civil marriage, why should laity? If it’s wrong for pastors, isn’t it wrong for parishioners?”

You can read Stonestreet’s full commentary here or listen to it below.

[audio:http://bit.ly/1ATLii9|titles=John Stonestreet – Separating Civil and Christian Marriage]

READ MORE