Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized! Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Idolater said:
us.cnn.com

Supreme Court rules in favor of Catholic foster care agency that refused to work with same-sex couples

The Supreme Court on Thursday said that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment when it froze the contract of a Catholic foster care agency that refused to work with same-sex couples as potential foster parents because the agency believes that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
us.cnn.com us.cnn.com
Click to expand...
Wow, who would have thought that Sonia Sotomayer and Elena Kagan would be on the side of religious freedom and rule against anti discrimination laws that protect their beloved homosexuals and transgenders? Do you think Sonia and Elena have found religion Idolater? (Yeah, that must be it) . Hmmmm....I'm wondering why the most conservative Justice on the Supreme Court, Clarence Thomas would write a concurring opinion? In any event, this of course means that the SCOTUS rulings against Christian baker Jack Phillips and all of those other Christian business owners who refused to cater to homosexual weddings based on Christian doctrine will be null and void and people of faith will be free to discriminate against homosexuals and hence follow their Christian faith again (yeah, uh huh).
Or maybe there's more to this story? (there always is).

Every article that I pull up on this case has wording like "The Supreme Court ruled that Philadelphia's refusal to work with the agency violates the First Amendment."

What exactly is does "refusal to work with the agency" mean? Either religious people and organizations can refuse to cater to homosexuals based solely on religious freedom or they can't, why must they "work with them"?

Something's rotten in Denmark....
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
" . . . Catholic Social Services . . . was unwilling to work with LGBTQ couples as foster parents . . . ."

So gay, right ACW?
 
Idolater

Idolater

"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
You're suggesting "LGBTQ couples" compete with Catholicism on sexual ethics?

Yep.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Idolater said:
" . . . Catholic Social Services . . . was unwilling to work with LGBTQ couples as foster parents . . . ."

So gay, right ACW?
Click to expand...
I'll review the different SCOTUS opinions in the SCOTUS blog in the next few days and see if I can figure out what "work with" means. The Alliance Defending Freedom is claiming this as a religious freedom victory but that's the same organization that defended Christian baker Jack Phillips ;using "artistic freedom" as a defense and claimed that the SCOTUS decision on that case was a victory for religious freedom as well (sending it back to the respective States for their courts to decide is hardly a victory).
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
More on Fulton v Philadelphia (Catholic Social Services regarding failure to adopt to homosexual couples)

Court holds that city’s refusal to make referrals to faith-based agency violates Constitution


The ruling was a victory for Catholic Social Services, an organization associated with the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, and two foster parents, who alleged that Philadelphia’s refusal to make foster-care referrals to CSS discriminated against the group because of its religious beliefs about traditional marriage. But the decision fell short of the broad endorsement of religious freedom that the challengers had sought. While the justices unanimously agreed with CSS and the foster parents that the city’s action was unconstitutional, a six-justice majority left intact the Supreme Court’s 1990 decision in Employment Division v. Smith, which held that government actions usually do not violate the free exercise clause as long as they are neutral and apply to everyone...
In his opinion concurring in the judgment, Gorsuch noted that if the court had overruled Smith, as Alito had suggested, “this case would end today.” Instead, Gorsuch objected, “the majority’s course guarantees that this litigation is only getting started.” The city will resist working with CSS as long as CSS refuses to certify same-sex couples, Gorsuch posited, and Thursday’s decision will allow the city to try to avoid doing so – for example, by rewriting its contract. And the effects of the court’s decision will not be limited to CSS, Gorsuch stressed: “Individuals and groups across the country will pay the price — in dollars, in time, and in continuing uncertainty about their religious liberties.”
www.scotusblog.com

Court holds that city’s refusal to make referrals to faith-based agency violates Constitution - SCOTUSblog

This article was updated on June 17 at 6:52 p.m. In a clash between religious freedom and public policies that protect LGBTQ people, the Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Philadelphia violated the First Amendment’s free exercise clause when the city stopped working with a Catholic organization th
www.scotusblog.com www.scotusblog.com

"Rewriting it's contract"...more on those important words later.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Reading more on the SCOTUS opinion on Fulton v Philadelphia:

The religious views of CSS inform its work in this system.
CSS believes that “marriage is a sacred bond between a
man and a woman.” App. 171. Because the agency understands the certification of prospective foster families to be
an endorsement of their relationships, it will not certify unmarried couples—regardless of their sexual orientation—or
same-sex married couples. CSS does not object to certifying
gay or lesbian individuals as single foster parents or to placing gay and lesbian children. No sought certification from CSS. If one did, CSS would direct
the couple to one of the more than 20 other agencies in the
City, all of which currently certify same-sex couples. For
over 50 years, CSS successfully contracted with the City to
provide foster care services while holding to these beliefs.

What a bunch of phonies Catholic Social Services is. They'll put foster kids in with a single homosexual male or female or I suspect a transgender, and will put children who are psychologically confused, believing that they're homosexual, in with a homosexual male, female or transgender, but not a 'married' homosexual couple.

If CSS had the best interest of children in mind, they'd be against allowing any child to be in the custody of homosexuals, be it a single foster parent who is homosexual, or being adopted by a homosexual couple.
This is the kind of insanity that we're seeing even in the Church since homosexuality has been decriminalized.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
When looking at a SCOTUS ruling involving homosexuality, the best source to go to is homosexual websites to see what their thoughts are on the case.
Looking at the views of Lambda Legal, National Center for Lesbian Rights and Transgender Law Center (Centerlink stresses the importance of passing the Equality Act), LGBT groups don't appear to be at all threatened by the Fulton v Philadelphia ruling, in fact they call it a "win" for LGBT rights.

Community reactions to Fulton v. City of Philadelphia decision

thegsba.org thegsba.org

As in the Masterpiece Cakeshop v CO Civil Rights Commission ruling, no pro LGBT anti discrimination laws have been overturned nor has this set a legal precedence like Roe v Wade, Lawrence v Texas and Obergefell v Hodges did.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Continuing with

Civll Government: The Neglected Ministry

Something every pastor should share with his congregation yearly, especially as election time nears.


The Magistrate's Ministry​

Romans 13, considered the key New Testament chapter on civil government, is one of the most neglected and misread chapters in the Bible. It is for this reason that it is all the more important to develop an understanding of our Lords requirements for magistrates and governmental activity. The word of God in Romans 13 teaches very clearly that the ruler, the magistrate, is a minister. First, the ruler is ordained of God, for he is definitely a power, and "the powers that be are ordained of God" (Rom. 13:1). Just as ministers in the Church are ordained of God, so the civil governors are ordained of God.​
 
Last edited:
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Second, the magistrate, the ruler, "is the minister of God to thee for good" (vs. 4). The ruler is God's minister, His diakonos. He is a deacon, a laborer, a ministrant, an attendant to people for God. As the derivation of diakonos shows, he is one who runs errands: God's errands. In particular, he is to be a Christian teacher and pastor. If the ruler is the minister of God to men for good, then he must rule in accordance with God's judgment of the good, not man's willful, subjective desire to redefine the good. If the ruler is a minister to men for good then he must enforce God's law, not man's desires: there is no other alternative.
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
The teaching, pastoring function of the ruler or magistrate is of crucial importance. We are popularly told today that the government should not seek to enforce morality — especially (Surprise!) Christian morality — because "you can't legislate morality." Clearly, this contention is at best a half-truth, and as such is a dangerous distortion. It is a distortion which fits quite well with the Humanist canard that "you can't mix religion and politics." All law commands human action; it seeks either to restrain or to urge particular actions. It necessarily says either "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not," and it backs these commands to action or restraint with coercion, with sanctions enforced by the power of the sword. The sword and the word are united in law. And because the word commands action by men, the word of law is necessarily a morel teaching, a teaching which seeks to guide the ruled along a particular way of action, of life. This way of life which the law-word commands is what the ruler or lawgiver considers good, and for this reason it is again inevitably a moral teaching, of one sort or another. By teaching men to obey the ruler or lawgiver's commands, via the punishment of those who disobey, who break the law, and by his personal exam pie, the magistrate can do nothing else than teach people moral principles. His teaching, punishing function is a pastoring function, for by it he guides his sheep toward what he considers green pastures and the safety of the fold, and away from what he considers precipices and beasts of prey. His sword is like the shepherd's staff: "if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil" (vs. 4). By striking fear into the hearts of the evil, he diverts them from their destruction and toward doing that which is good.

I was told by a libertarian in another forum this morning that "you can't legilsate morality". I told him that libertarains don't have a problem decdriminalizing laws that go against their agenda nor passing lawss that promote their agenda, i.e. "legislating morality", in this case immoral behavior.
"All law commands human action; it seeks either to restrain or to urge particular actions. It necessarily says either "Thou shalt" or "Thou shalt not," and it backs these commands to action or restraint with coercion, with sanctions enforced by the power of the sword."
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Idolater said:
us.cnn.com

California bans state-funded travel to five new states over anti-LGBTQ laws | CNN Politics

California will ban state-funded travel to five new states over their "discriminatory" LGBTQ laws, state Attorney General Rob Bonta announced Monday, citing the importance of "aligning our dollars with our values."
us.cnn.com us.cnn.com
Click to expand...
Yet those 5 States mentioned have legislation that allows cross dressing (transvestism), genital mutilation surgery and males using the same restrooms, fitting rooms and locker rooms as women and little girls. I guess when it comes to sports, those 5 States think that their LGBT allies have really crossed the line!
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Before I continue with "Civil Government: The Neglected Ministry"

this just in from the Supreme Court:

Supreme Court declines appeal from florist who refused service for same-sex couples​


7-2-21


The Supreme Court on Friday declined to hear a case over a Washington state florist's refusal to service a wedding for a same-sex couple, letting stand a state court's ruling that the shop had engaged in unlawful discrimination over sexual orientation...

At least four justices must vote in favor of granting a petition for review in order for the court to hear a pending case.

According to a tally published by the court, Justices Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas voted in favor of taking up the case.

The lawsuit was brought in 2013 by Robert Ingersoll and Curt Freed, who were turned away by Arlene's Flowers, a flower shop in Richland, Wash., when looking for a florist for their wedding.

Read more: https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...s-appeal-from-florist-who-refused-service-for

StutzmanCaseSCOTUS.png


So two Trump appointed Justices, Brett Kavanaugh and Mrs. Barrett, refused to even hear the case while the one (Neil Gorsuch) who wrote the majority opinion on the homosexual/transgender civil rights case known as Bostock v Clayton Co. GA voted to hear the religious freedom case.

The assault on religious freedom: yet another reason "Why Homosexuality MUST Be Recriminalized!"
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hobby Lobby has the right idea and liberals and libertarians are scared to death.

Hobby Lobby advocates for a Christian-run government in Independence Day ads placed in many national newspapers​


July 5, 2021

On Independence Day, Hobby Lobby ran an advertisement in many newspapers across the country that advocated for a Christian-run government.

The ad, under the title "One Nation Under God," included the biblical verse: "Blessed is the Nation whose God is the lord."

Images of the advertisement were published on the company's site and social media.

The full-page ad featured three columns that quote former US presidents and other historical figures, as well as Supreme Court rulings about Christianity.

"It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor," the ad reads in part, quoting George Washington.

In a holiday message posted on its website, Hobby Lobby said they'd been placing holiday advertisements since founder David Greene felt "commissioned" by God to make them after he saw advertisements during the 1995 Christmas season.

Some who saw the ad were upset at the call for combining Church and State.

"A full-page ad by @HobbyLobby in newspapers today ignoring the separation of church and state. I never will set foot in a ⁦@HobbyLobby⁩, which believes America should be a theocracy," commentator Terry Blount wrote on Twitter.

An Oregon resident who saw the ad in the Register-Guard called it "absolutely frightening," and encouraged people not to shop at Hobby Lobby.
www.businessinsider.com

Hobby Lobby advocates for a Christian-run government in Independence Day ads placed in many national newspapers

The ad, under the title "One Nation Under God," included the biblical verse: "Blessed is the Nation whose God is the lord."
www.businessinsider.com www.businessinsider.com



18-8338-2019-IDMA-750x3002.jpg
 
aCultureWarrior

aCultureWarrior

BANNED
Banned
LIFETIME MEMBER
Continuing with "Civil Government: The Neglected Ministry"

"Now, the actual laws passed and enforced by the magistrate may or may not be God's laws. Clearly, if man's laws contradict God's laws, then man's laws are both truly lawless and without authority. since they command us to do that which our Lord forbids us to do. Human laws which contradict God's laws may be part of a"moral system," and inevitably convey a "moral" teaching, but we cannot escape the fact that words which command that which God forbids are immoral, lawless words: This is part of the reason that the ruler, in his pastoring, teaching function, must enforce God's laws, God's moral system and moral teaching: otherwise, he would be not God's minister to men for good, but rather man's minister to man for evil. Rulers who enforce man's antinomian (against God's law) laws become false shepherds who drive the sheep to destruction."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top