Barack Obama and His College Sweetheart
From the National Catholic Register:
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that same-sex “marriage” is a constitutional right, in a long-awaited decision that will have sweeping and unpredictable consequences for U.S. jurisprudence, cultural norms and religious freedom.
Catholic leaders, legal scholars and marriage experts reacted with dismay to the landmark ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges and three related cases. But they also expressed resolve that the decision would not discourage their efforts to preach and teach the truth about marriage and to advance respect for the institution as a union of one man and one woman committed to the care and education of children.
“The Supreme Court’s 5-4 decision on marriage is not a surprise. The surprise will come as ordinary people begin to experience, firsthand and painfully, the impact of today’s action on everything they thought they knew about marriage, family life, our laws and our social institutions,” said Archbishop Charles Chaput of Philadelphia, in a statement marking the decision.
“The mistakes of the court change nothing about the nature of men and women and the truth of God’s word. The task now for believers is to form our own families even more deeply in the love of God and to rebuild a healthy marriage culture, one marriage at a time, from the debris of today’s decision.”
Archbishop Joseph Kurtz of Louisville, Ky., the president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, equated today’s decision with the court’s controversial Roe v. Wade ruling that legalized abortion on demand. And he vowed that Church leaders would not abandon the truth about marriage.
“Jesus Christ, with great love, taught unambiguously that, from the beginning, marriage is the lifelong union of one man and one woman,” said Archbishop Kurtz, in a statement. “As Catholic bishops, we follow Our Lord and will continue to teach and to act according to this truth.”
He said it was “profoundly immoral and unjust for the government to declare that two people of the same sex can constitute a marriage.” Statements issued by Catholic leaders underscored a deepening anxiety that changes in the civil code will sow confusion about the meaning and purpose of marriage, the gift of masculinity and femininity and the rights of natural parents and their children.
Thus, the Archdiocese of Washington drew a bright line between religious/moral truths and civil law. “Men and women are not interchangeable. Marriage is not ours to define. History, nature and revelation all profess these truths,” read the archdiocese’s statement, which emphasized that the “court deals with civil law, not revealed truth or religious faith.”
During argument before SCOTUS the govt attorneys ACKNOWLEDGED that on eof the ultimate outcomes of a SCOTUS rule in favor of making gay marriage accepted by law nationally could/would be that those churches (or orthodox or conservative synagogues, mosques, etc) resisting and refusing - LOSING TAX EXEMPTIONS
Think about it. Give me the answer:
BY WHAT PRACTICE DOES OUR GOVERNMENT LEVY TAXES?
Constitution gives that power to the legislature doesn't it?
Article 1 section 8
However .. the IRS, like the EPA is an executive branch entity given by congress, the POWER to extend its own authority
The Legislature imposes taxes.
What is the Legislature?
It enacts "Legilation".
What is Legislation?
Legislation (or "statutory law") is law which has been promulgated (or "enacted") by a legislature or other governing body or the process of making it.
What does the First Amendment say?
"Legislation (or "statutory law") is law which has been promulgated (or "enacted") by a legislature or other governing body or the process of making it. "
I'm sorry, I mean to type:
What does the First Amendment say?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion
The half truth is equivalent to a lie in many instances and that definition of the First Amendment by anonymous is an example of that equivalence.
That's not my definition of the first amendment. It is the first amendment.
No it's not you liar. Go look it up you purveyor of the half truth. Then I dare you to actually write down the First Amendment you LIAR. You forget where you are here, we all know that you are lying and we know what the First Amendment actually says and recognize your deception.
No, I'm not lying. My point is simply this:
If Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..." then that means Congress has no right to tax religion.
That's it. That's the whole of my point.
Do you disagree with that?
The rest of the text of the first amendment is this:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
But I didn't need the rest to make my point.
So, do you disagree with my point?
No as in I agree with your point, but it won't stop nor even slow them down. Constitutionalism, truth, right or wrong are all dead.
One more leftist justice and the flood gates will be opened.
I swear I wouldn't be surprised at this point if Scalia, Thomas, or Alito had an 'accident'.
Yeah, I agree with that. I don't think it will slow the illegal Supreme Court down.
The Supreme Court, led by Benedict Roberts (one of the worst human beings in the history of the USA) is out of control and needs to be shut down.
Post a Comment