Conservatives Vow to Defy Supreme Court If It Rules for Marriage Equality

UPDATED: Sunday, June 23, 2013 06:17
VIEWED: 2022
PAGE 1 of 1

Friday, June 21, 2013 7:32 AM


Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

"You don't rule our way: Screw you!", in essence. A huge group of anti-gay activists released a letter Thursday vowing to ignore any U.S. Supreme Court ruling in favor of marriage equality for same-sex couples:

As Christian citizens united together, we will not stand by while the destruction of the institution of marriage unfolds in this nation we love. The Sacred Scriptures and unbroken teaching of the Church confirm that marriage is between one man and one woman. We stand together in solidarity to defend marriage and the family and society founded upon them. The effort to redefine marriage threatens the proper mediating role of the Church in society.

Experience and history have shown us that if the government redefines marriage to grant a legal equivalency to same-sex couples, that same government will then enforce such an action with the police power of the State. This will bring about an inevitable collision with religious freedom and conscience rights. We cannot and will not allow this to occur on our watch. Religious freedom is the first freedom in the American experiment for good reason. ...

If the Supreme Court were to issue a decision that redefined marriage or provided a precedent on which to build an argument to redefine marriage, the Supreme Court will thereby undermine its legitimacy. The Court will significantly decrease its credibility and impair the role it has assumed for itself as a moral authority. It will be acting beyond its proper constitutional role and contrary to the Natural Moral Law which transcends religions, culture, and time.

As Christians united together in defense of marriage, we pray that this will not happen. But, make no mistake about our resolve. While there are many things we can endure, redefining marriage is so fundamental to the natural order and the true common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross. - See more at:

It was drafted by Liberty Counsel's Mat Staver and Deacon Keith Fournier, and signed by Family Research Council president Tony Perkins, Traditional Values Coalition chairman Rev. Louis Sheldon, Tea Party activist Ben Carson, former Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell (R), former Republican presidential candidate Gary Bauer, Matt Barber, Penny Nance, James Dobson, Richard Land, Judith Reisman, Linda Harvey, Bill Donohue, Don Wildmon, Andrea Lafferty, Janet Porter, Peter LaBarbera, Ralph Reed, Bishop Harry Jackson, conservative movement legend Richard Viguerie, Focus on the Family founder Rev. James Dobson, birther Joseph Farah, disgraced Abramoff scandal figure Ralph Reed and Oklahoma Rep. Sally Kern (R), a veritable Who's Who of anti-gay activists.

Now, Staver has said that the court “could split the country right in two” as “this is the thing that revolutions literally are made of”*, and Perkins last month maintained that the Supreme Court may start a “revolution” and “break this nation apart” by striking down gay marriage bans**. What do you think they're threatening--er, VOWING--or are they just blowing smoke up our asses? How would this "defiance" take effect, I wonder?

It matters not, of course, that the provisions of the U.S. Constitution grant the high court judicial power in “all cases, in law and equity, arising under this Constitution,” and the 14th Amendment guarantees “equal protection of the laws” for all persons. If it's not the "equal protection" THEY think is right, apparently, it doesn't count...


** http://www.


Friday, June 21, 2013 9:22 AM


Mrs BC brought this one to my attention this morning.

Her POV is that these people are private citizens, or low level pols. Her point is: What are these folks going to do about defying the ruling? What power do they ACTUALLY have? Answer, not much. They can flap their jaws, and picket Fred Phelps style. But they themselves cannot pass any legislation, enforce any rules, or arrest anybody.

They can be a vocal pressure group, but unless they convince a bunch of legislators, that's all they'll be.


Friday, June 21, 2013 12:25 PM


If these Conservatives really wanted to defend the sanctity of marriage, they would fight for tougher divorce laws and make adultery illegal.

(How's that sound, Newt??)

King of the Mythical Land that is Iowa


Friday, June 21, 2013 2:39 PM


Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Well said, Penguin! The hypocrisy would be amusing, if they weren't so damned ugly about it, IMHO.

NewOld, when you've got a "former Ohio Secretary of State" and an "Oklahoma Representative", there's power there. Those are the ones that worry me, and those who influence them. And others they all might influence to feel that, in following the behest of "figures of authority", they might have the right to do something. Ugly mentalities have caused trouble in the past, an will in the future, and that's always regrettable.


Friday, June 21, 2013 3:50 PM


Keep the Shiny side up


A bunch (well, several dozen, which I might not quantify as "a huge group") of narrowminded folks that you and I agree are wrong threaten to defy laws they don't agree with, and you criticize them for threatening to defy the law.

When Occupy folks defied laws against tresspassing and ignored eviction notices and other laws, did you criticize them for defying the law?

So is it that they're threatening to defy a law, or just that you don't agree with them?

"When your heart breaks, you choose what to fill the cracks with. Love or hate. But hate won't ever heal. Only love can do that."


Friday, June 21, 2013 4:15 PM


"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)


Originally posted by Penguin:
If these Conservatives really wanted to defend the sanctity of marriage, they would fight for tougher divorce laws and make adultery illegal.

(How's that sound, Newt??)

Also, if they're so concerned about abortion and birth control, why aren't we making vasectomies illegal?

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I was wrong" - Hero, 2012

Mitt Romney, introducing his running mate: "Join me in welcoming the next President of the United States, Paul Ryan!"

Rappy's response? "You're lying, gullible ( believing in some BS you heard on msnbc ) or hard of hearing."


Saturday, June 22, 2013 3:25 AM


Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Not even close, Geezer. You know full well that the threat they are making is not of civil disobedience or disobeying laws, but one of civil war, of revolution. They make that perfectly clear...and by the way, not a few dozen, but over 200, if you read the full articles. There will, of course, be many more who will jump on the bandwagon now, I'm sure.

You want to point to far-left groups who have advocated revolution and civil war, you might have a corollary. Which of course is irrelevant, because all you wanted to do was snark, everyone understands.


Sunday, June 23, 2013 6:17 AM


Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

There's also the fact that, added to the fact that it's not "a bunch" or even "a couple dozen", these people represent GROUPS. For your edification, here is a partial list of groups and individuals who signed this odious letter:

American Family Association

American Family Association of Pennsylvania

Americans for Truth About Homosexuality

Family Research Council

Illinois Family Institute

Mission America

The Pray in Jesus Name Project

Traditional Values Coalition

You Can Run But You Can Not Hide International (now, there’s a creepy name)

Each of those represents a group of people; each of the authority-figure individuals has followers. In essence, by their wording all of these are at the very least stating that the Supreme Court has no right to decide our laws, and at the worst intimating that if the Supreme Court doesn't do what they want, they will lead the country into civil war. That's about as un-American as you can get.

That bears absolutely NO comparison to Occupy's civil disobedience, which was exactly that: civil disobedience to PROTEST something, a concept upon which our Democracy is based.






new deadly human-to-human-transmissible coronavirus emerges out of China
Tue, September 22, 2020 08:02 - 2241 posts
A thread for Democrats Only
Tue, September 22, 2020 06:11 - 4031 posts
In the garden, and RAIN!!!!
Tue, September 22, 2020 03:09 - 5539 posts
The truth: It's too late. We will go extinct, very soon. Enjoy the time you have left.
Mon, September 21, 2020 22:52 - 630 posts
Nancy Needs an Upgrade from WindowsXP
Mon, September 21, 2020 22:33 - 1 posts
Ginsberg Dies, Trump Is President
Mon, September 21, 2020 22:30 - 28 posts
What REAL TDS looks like
Mon, September 21, 2020 19:03 - 109 posts
A remarkable and nightmarish scene playing out in Portland should terrify anyone who cares about the US constitution
Mon, September 21, 2020 18:56 - 815 posts
The overwhelming idiocy of the Reichwing
Mon, September 21, 2020 18:55 - 39 posts
Some Covid-19 thoughts
Mon, September 21, 2020 18:53 - 1324 posts
The Recipe Thread
Mon, September 21, 2020 18:31 - 202 posts
Congress Still Jacking Off Over Unemployment
Mon, September 21, 2020 17:41 - 26 posts