We will view any decision by the Supreme Court or any court the same way history views the Dred Scott and Buck v. Bell decisions. Our highest respect for the rule of law requires that we not respect an unjust law that directly conflicts with higher law. A decision purporting to redefine marriage flies in the face of the Constitution and is contrary to the natural created order. As people of faith we pledge obedience to our Creator when the State directly conflicts with higher law. We respectfully warn the Supreme Court not to cross this line.There is a lot in the entire pledge with which I would take issue. But what I want to know is, what do they mean when they promise to "not respect" the law?
We stand united together in defense of marriage. 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 common good that this is the line we must draw and one we cannot and will not cross.
Frankly, when I first heard about this I had a little laugh about them saying they won't obey the law. If they want to take the bold stand that they will definitely NOT marry someone of the same sex - no matter what the Supreme Court says - I think we're all cool with that. Just like we're cool with them never having an abortion under any circumstances.
That's what these religious conservatives don't get. Oh sure, now they've gotten into the whole idea that baking a cake for a gay wedding means they've broken their covenant with God. And so we're going to have to deal with the question of discrimination all over again. But let's not kid ourselves. When they go so far as to threaten the Supreme Court if they allow gay marriage, this is about the need to control what WE do, not what they can/can't do.