President Barack Obama responded Friday to the Supreme Court's 5-4 favorable ruling gay marriage, saying that the decision was "a victory for the allies and friends and supporters who spent years, even decades working and praying for change to come."
The Supreme Court's decision putting an end to state bans on issuing marriage licenses for same-sex couples was in response to the Obergefell v. Hodges. Read CP's coverage of the ruling: Supreme Court Says States Must Recognize Gay Marriage. Read the court's ruling here.
Watch a video of Obama's remarks on the Supreme Court ruling in the video player below: more >>
In the wake of the Supreme Court's 5-4 ruling Friday that the Fourteenth Amendment requires all 50 states to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, numerous social conservative and religious groups are calling the court's ruling an abuse of judicial power and a decision that could hurt religious liberty in America.
Among the numerous commenters, Family Research Council President Tony Perkins wrote in a statement that the court's ruling violates the Constitution's call for states to define their own marriage laws.
"Five justices on the Supreme Court have overturned the votes of 50 million Americans and demanded that the American people walk away from millennia of history and the reality of human nature," Perkins stated. "In reaching a decision so lacking in foundation in the text of the Constitution, in our history, and in our traditions, the Court has done serious damage to its own legitimacy." more >>
The lone African-American justice on the Supreme Court dissented from the landmark ruling declaring gay marriage legal nationwide, addressing, in part, the majority opinion's view that gay marriage would bestow dignity upon gay couples.
In a 5-4 decision, the highest court in the land ruled Friday morning that state-level gay marriage bans violate the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Justice Clarence Thomas, one of the four dissenters, wrote in his dissent that the government cannot bestow "dignity" to gay marriages, despite the ruling. more >>
Robert George, Professor of Jurisprudence at Princeton University, Visiting Professor at Harvard Law School, Director of the James Madison Program in American Ideals and Institutions, fellow at the Witherspoon Institute and the Hoover Institution, and co-author of the Manhattan Declaration, offered a sobering summation of the consequences of redefining marriage from the traditional definition of the legitimate union of man and woman to an affectional relationship between any two people at Hillsdale College's Washington facility on Tuesday, June 23.
Professor George noted that only very recently advocates of marriage redefinition were maintaining it would leave persons and institutions which adhered to the traditional definition of marriage unaffected. No one's marriage would be affected by redefinition, it would have no impact on the public understanding of marriage, and would in fact strengthen the institution by broadening the base of people included in it. Religious and other traditionalist organizations would not be compelled by law to accept the new definition in their functioning, they would not have to pay spousal benefits to marriages they thought improper, no one would be fired or otherwise penalized for their opposition to homosexual marriage. There would be no extension of the logic of accepting non-traditional relationships into social and legal acceptance of polyamorous relationships (involving more than two people). All of these possibilities were rejected as "scare tactics" and fallacious "slippery slope" reasoning.
However, George said, the logic of marriage redefinition to include same-sex couples is that traditional marriage exclusively between a man and a woman lacks a rational basis. Only prejudice and hate can explain the exclusion of same-sex couples, and so no reasonable person of good will can insist on it. This puts traditional morality on the same level as racism, in which an unreasonable criterion is used to disadvantage and harass people. The conclusion that marriage is irrational began to be drawn in the 1960s, George said, when advocates of the early sexual revolution declared that people were better off without traditional morality; unhappy spouses should not be bound to their mates, children were better off if they were not in unhappy marriages, etc. more >>
Justices of the United States Supreme Court have recognized a Constitutional right to marriage between couples of the same sex. Ruling 5-4 in the case of Obergefell v. Hodges, justices this morning overturned same-sex marriage bans in Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky and Tennessee. The ruling mandates that same-sex marriage be imposed in all 14 states that recognize marriage as exclusively a union between one man and one woman, while reaffirming the other states where courts have overturned state laws.
As in other infamous politicized rulings, the Supreme Court has chosen fashion over law. There are no winners, and the biggest losers are children in America who are the chief victims of the breakdown of marriage and family.
As The Church has for 42 years rallied ongoing resistance to the court's Roe vs. Wade invention of a right to unrestricted abortion, so now The Church must resist the court's attempt to claim authority over the definition of marriage. more >>
The U.S. Supreme Court struck down four state constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman in a landmark decision.
After years of refusing to take up the matter, the highest court in the land ruled 5-4 Friday in Obergefell v. Hodges that state-level gay marriage bans are unconstitutional, concluding that 14th Amendment requires a state to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples.
Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote the majority opinion, reversing the ruling in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals that ruled such bans constitutional. more >>