The Michigan Supreme Court has ruled against giving domestic partnership benefits for homosexual couples working in state university and government agencies.
In a 5-2 ruling this past week, state Supreme Court justices overruled a decision by a lower appeals court to give same-sex couples health benefits, citing the passage of the state’s 2004 Marriage Protection Amendment as the basis of its decision.
"We conclude that the marriage amendment which states that 'the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any purpose,' prohibits public employers from providing health-insurance benefits to their employees' qualified same-sex domestic partners,” the court wrote in its ruling.
In 2004, a majority of voters in Michigan and over a dozen other states were prompted to pass a marriage amendment after the State Supreme Court in Massachusetts ruled in favor of gay “marriage.”
While the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Michigan decried the latest ruling as "flawed and unfortunate," pro-family groups were ecstatic.
“The people of Michigan have constitutionally protected marriage as exclusively the union of one man and one woman, period, and that includes prohibiting the recognition of homosexual relationships as equal or similar to marriage for any purpose, including offering spousal-type benefits to the homosexual partners of government employees,” explained Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan, according to Catholic News Agency.
Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Thomas More Law Center, said that the ruling in Michigan was a victory for the sanctity of marriage everywhere.
“This ruling not only affirms the lower court ruling, but affirms the institution of marriage. In effect, it strengthens the institution and will preserve it for generations to come,” he told LifeSiteNews.com.
Since 2004, when the Massachusetts State Supreme Court made its ruling to recognize gay “marriage,” 26 states have passed a constitutional ban on the practice, while over a dozen others have passed laws limiting or outlawing it.
Comments
Daniel Paul: What are you talking about? Evolution has nothing to do with "disproving accountability to God." That is utterly ridiculous. Evolution is science. Period. Stop making it more than it is.
Ok, but that doesn't answer my question about God v. Satan. How could God let Satan overpower something he created in his image and likeness? That part doesn't make sense to me.
Bmore, I know people who believe they are going to make a million bucks with some new business idea. That doesn't make it so. :-) The concept of evolution was to disprove accountability to God by disproving creation. This is admitted by many folks involved and restated at the Darwinian Centenial Convention. It was not set out as science but rather as an attempt to use science to disprove accountability to our Creator. (no creation-no Creator)
"Original sin" exists even though people choose not to believe it. The sinful nature of man exists even though people choose not to believe it. My 4 year old doesn't always believe me that he's doing something wrong but I correct that misperception. God does the same for those who will listen now -or- it will happen when 'we get home'. How do I know this. I know my Father. I have a relationship with Him.
What we believe does not determine truth. God determines truth. We either accept or reject it.
Here's a question for everyone: If you believe in evolution, which I do, then you don't believe the story of Adam and Eve was real. That being said, what is the belief regarding original sin? Wouldn't that be put into place by God, or is the belief that Satan put sin in the world? Again, if you believe that, wouldn't you also need to believe that Satan is just as powerful, if not moreso, than God in order to mess up what he had created? I'm not trying to be at all inflammatory, just asking quesitons to people who seem to know the Bible inside out and backwards.
IN the beginning there was no sickness or sin. Today we have sickness and sin, because of original sin. I just wanted to clarify my point. Sin disfigures a person by the choices they make and in their bodilly condition. It may not be there fault, but with prayer and supplication you will still be able to walk with God.
To be Gay is to have a disorder. We all have crosses we have to deal with. Because of original sin, our human nature has a proclivity to sin and sometimes that sin takes various forms like homosexual attraction, being born with Epilepsy, being born with congenital heart failure, etc. The point about the gay disorder is that you must not act on it.
Homosexuals should always be treated with respect and we are called to love one another, but hate the sin. Narrow is the gate that leads to eternal life and what you do in your body effects your soul. The Bible is quite explicit about who will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
Stay chaste and repent!
Also, there ARE NO ERRORS IN THE BIBLE!!! The Bible is inerrant and is the infallible Word of God! Don't sacrilege our Scripture to justify your lifestyle.
Give your heart to Christ and he will repair your soul.
ifeelfine72
How do you know that you are saved?
CanadianChristian: How about you read what I write before you react to it? I've always maintained that I am against abortion because I don't believe that is part of God's plan for us. And where in the Bible does it say it is to be taken literally? I'll give you a hint, it doesn't because you can't - there are too many factual errors in the Bible to take it literally.
feelfine72,
You do not speak for CHRIST, HIS word speaks for HIM. You have a bad case of "itchy ears" I suggest some intense bible study, why do you persist in trying to justify unbiblical things like abortion, homosexuality, etc. I suggest strongly that you really think and pray about what you are believing and saying-because we all know the punishment for leading others astray will be severe, and by the way GOD'S WORD IS TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY- What a terrible thing it will be to fall into the hands of the living GOD!!! IN JESUS NAME
ifeelfine - Fair enough - and consistant with what I meant. The bible is not to be taken literally.
free2b - If I believed the Bible literally, that might be a problem. If you believe the Bible literally, you have to believe abortion is okay. Me, I don't take it literally - that is why I am in favor of gay marriage but against abortion. I believe both positions take into account God's grace and love and His ultimate command for us. I know that is not a popular view on this site, but it is honest, consistant and Biblical.
I flagged myself.
Oh, FYI - yes, I am in a stable, long term, committed relationship that would lead to marriage if I lived in a civilised country.
argyle - had marriage been an option, yes I'd have waited.
ifeelfine - "It's the same with abortion, there is nothing in the Bible specifically condemning abortion but only when we answer in grace do we see what the answer is. " It's been a long time since I've read a bible, but I do remember that by the law of Moses, if a man strikes a woman and she is killed, he is to be convicted of murder. However, if he strikes a pregnant woman and she miscarries, he only has to pay the family some sum of money. The point is that the bible is not a very good source for this sort of stuff (OH NO - now I"ll have to be stoned!)
But my last point leads me to point out one last thing. My being gay is less a choice than my being right handed. I've always found that to be more an appropriate comparison than my hair or skin color.
Get some self control, If God makes people the way they think they are it doesnt give them right to sin, God gave me hormones, now does that give me rights by God to have sex outside of marriage, by no means, I admit to falling into this sin, but it has been my responsibilty to TURN AWAY from it. Yeah it sucks, I propbly will never find a girl willing to wait with me but hey thats the way it is if i want to be a Christian. Theres more to life than finding someone that gives you sexual gratification whether you are strait or gay. Suck it up and bite the bullet. I dont know becuse im not a homosexual but if they had marriage rights I wonder how many would be willing to wait till marriage. This isnt a judgemental statement, but im just curious?