As you read this, remember how many times leftists assured Americans that homosexuals wanted nothing more than to be left alone to do their thing in the privacy of their bedrooms. And remember how they asserted that the legalization of same-sex “marriage” would affect no one, no way, no how.
Posted in Federal
Tagged Anthony Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Corruption of Marriage Act, Defense of Marriage Act, James Lankford, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Mitt Romney, Obergefell v. Hodges, Republican National Committee, Respect for Marriage Act, Ronna Romney McDaniel, U.S. Supreme Court
Today we give thanks to God for the wisdom and courage of U.S Supreme Court Justices Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett for holding that the “Constitution does not confer a right to abortion; Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey are overruled; [and] the authority to regulate abortion is returned to the people and their elected representatives.”
Posted in Sanctity of Life
Tagged Amy Coney Barrett, Antonin Scalia, Bill of Rights, Brett Kavanaugh, Casey v. Planned Parenthood, Clarence Thomas, Dobbs v. the Jackson, Due Process Clause, Griswold v Connecticut, Hugo Black., Jane’s Revenge, Lawrence v. Texas, Neil Gorsuch, Obergefell v. Hodges, Robert Bork, Roe v. Wade, Samuel Alito, SCOTUS
While a number of cases have reached the U.S. Supreme Court challenging government pandemic restrictions that limit churches’ and members free exercise of religion, Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church v. Pritzker presents direct legal conflict between jurisdictions (traditionally the primary basis for Supreme Court hearing) and raises crucial additional questions that need resolution by the U.S. Supreme Court, to re-protect and strengthen our first and most important liberty.
For these reasons, IFI has joined an Amicus Brief in support of Elim Romanian.
Until 1990, the U.S. Supreme Court had rightly afforded the highest level of protection to our first freedom, the …
Posted in Religious Liberty
Tagged Amy Barrett, Antonin Scalia, Calvary Chapel Dayton Valley, Donald J. Trump, Elim Romanian Pentecostal Church v. Pritzker, Employment Division v. Smith, John Roberts, Nevada v. Sisolak, Obergefell v. Hodges, Religious Freedom Restoration Act, Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn vs. Cuomo, Southbay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom, U.S. Supreme Court
Mississippi has become the latest test case for determining parental rights of same-sex couples where one of the adults has no biological relation to the child. Nationwide, disputes are raging about what the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to impose its redefinition of marriage on all 50 states now means for designations of parenthood, which prior to its opinion, rested on a paradigm that recognized children as the biological creation of a male (i.e. “father”) and female (i.e. “mother”).
What we call the pro-family movement is a component of the larger conservative movement and deals with matters of sexuality and the natural family. Its American roots are in the cultural backlash to the Marxist revolution of the 1960s that turned family-centered society on its head and swapped the Judeo-Christian morality of our founding for Soviet-style “political correctness.”
Posted in Faith, Marriage/Family/Culture
Tagged Alfred Kinsey, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia, Bowers v Hardwick, Cultural Marxism, Donald Trump, Frankfort School, Griswold v Connecticut, Hugh Hefner, Lawrence v. Texas, Neil Gorsuch, No Special Rights Act, Obergefell v. Hodges, Robert Bork, Roe v. Wade, Romer v Evans, Ronald Reagan, Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Scott Lively, sexual anarchy, Steven Broyer
Last time we covered two recent articles from Public Discourse — here are brief excerpts from three more.
The first is from Ryan T. Anderson — note the important introduction following the title:
How to Think About Discrimination: Race, Sex, and SOGI
Sexual orientation and gender identity (SOGI) antidiscrimination laws are unjustified, but if other policies are adopted to address the mistreatment of people who identify as LGBT, they must leave people free to engage in legitimate actions based on the conviction that we are created male and female and that male and female are created for each other.
Baseball season gets underway this week, a welcome distraction from the political battles in Washington.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate is warring over the confirmation of Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. The Republicans say he’s a stellar nominee, a judicial umpire who calls balls and strikes as he sees them. Democrats, led by New York’s Charles Schumer, however, say the judge is a creature of “special interests” who would slide into a base with spikes up and who deserves to be filibustered.
Who are those “special interests” you might ask? Well, they would be anyone who disagrees with progressives, …
In June of 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that same-sex couples could not be denied marriage licenses by states. However, on December 8, 2016, the Arkansas Supreme Court correctly ruled that the Obergefell decision should not be used to re-write all state laws relating to family, parenthood, and vital records, when they are unrelated to the issuance of marriage licenses.
The decision, in the case of Smith v. Pavan, overturned a lower court decision that had declared the Arkansas law governing birth registration unconstitutional. The statute in question says that in the absence of …
Remember the 11,588,500 word bill passed by Congress in 2010, accompanied by the hopeful promise of easy-access healthcare? The bill that continues to cause the closure of small businesses and price hikes in the insurance market? That’s right, the Affordable Care Act (aka “Obamacare”) strikes again.
Kentucky Gov. Matt Bevin signed a bill Wednesday that removes the names and titles of county clerks from marriage licenses, giving legal "finality" to the religious accommodation that Rowan County clerk Kim Davis was looking for.
[On Friday] in a 170-page ruling, the Alabama Supreme Court rejected the U.S. Supreme Court’s marriage opinion by issuing its own Judgment in favor of Liberty Counsel’s Petition for Mandamus. In the petition, Liberty Counsel demanded on behalf of its Alabama clients – Alabama Policy Institute (“API”) and Alabama Citizens Action Program (“ALCAP”) – that the state’s probate judges obey Alabama’s Constitution and laws. On March 4, 2015, the Alabama Supreme Court ordered the probate judges to immediately cease issuing same-sex marriage licenses.
“The ruling last year by the Alabama Supreme Court was historic, and is one of the most …
Posted in Federal, Marriage/Family/Culture
Tagged Alabama Citizens Action Program, Alabama Policy Institute, John Robert, Liberty Counsel, Marriage, Mat Staver, Obergefell v. Hodges, Roy Moore, Same-sex marriage, SCOTUS, Tom Parker
The importance of Justice Antonin Scalia, who passed away this past weekend, is based not just in what he said in his U.S. Supreme Court opinions, but how he said it. As the life and work of Justice Scalia are honored and remembered, conservatives would do well to be grateful for his bold leadership on behalf of the originalist moorings of constitutional jurisprudence.
There’s much talk of late about Kim Davis, the Kentucky county clerk who was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licenses to gay couples. She actually stopped issuing all marriage licenses, to avoid the charge of discrimination. She’s now out of jail, although it’s possible she’ll be sent back.
A consensus appears to be developing among otherwise reasonable people that Kim Davis, of Rowan County fame, either needs to start issuing marriage licenses or quit her job.
For those just joining us, a county clerk in Kentucky is refusing to issue marriage licenses against her conscience and is also refusing to resign. Her name, which should be on a bronze plaque on the side of the courthouse, is Kim Davis. A federal judge has ordered her to appear in his courtroom Thursday to explain why Davis should not be held in contempt of court for refusing to issue marriage …
The two major decisions recently handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court have very direct relationships to public opinion. One of the decisions fits well with majority public opinion. The other, in a broad sense, does not. The first corresponds to public opinion that has shifted significantly over the past several years, while the second relates to public opinion that has been more fixed.