The Engage Family Blog

Official Blog of The Family Policy Council of West Virginia

Austin Nimocks: Same-sex marriage is not all roses

with one comment

Our good friend from the Alliance Defense Fund, Austin Nimocks, makes several excellent observations in his recent editorial published yesterday in a Vermont newspaper.

Give the whole article a read, but here are some highlights:

As we have expanded our societal tolerance for sexual behavior in recent years, the ongoing debate over same-sex “marriage” has actually started to bring about some agreement from both sides of the aisle. Agreement by same-sex “marriage” proponents and foes? Yes, you heard me right. And this agreement is worth exploring…since it will likely shape the same-sex “marriage” debate in Vermont and nationally for the next several years.

No, it’s not agreement on same-sex “marriage” itself. The agreement is that a serious conflict exists between same-sex “marriage” and religious liberty. On this point, there is no debate, except among the uninformed. Even same-sex “marriage” advocate, and Georgetown law professor Chai Feldblum understands this principle, if you read her Web site and writings. The question then becomes, “What do we do about it?”

. . .

Now, before you stop reading because you think you’re not “religious,” let me assure you that everyone is. That is, everyone has a set of values or beliefs by which we order our thoughts, values, and lives. Some of us follow a Judeo-Christian ethic, while others follow one grounded in purely secular principles. However, whatever the source of your religion, you’re entitled to hold those beliefs and order your life accordingly. And whether you support or oppose same-sex “marriage” is beside the point. Either way, you should unequivocally support the right of all Americans to disagree if they choose to disagree. This means that you should be able to disagree in spirit, word, and deed. And even if you’re not passionate about the same-sex “marriage” debate in and of itself, you should care about how this conflict is handled because the next great social debate could surround something about which you do care. If freedoms for all aren’t upheld in this battle, the legal precedents that flow might affect you next.

via Same-sex marriage is not all roses: Times Argus Online.


Written by Jeremy Dys

April 30, 2009 at 1:56 pm

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “The agreement is that a serious conflict exists between same-sex “marriage” and religious liberty.”

    Actually, there isn’t a conflict.

    Churches, Temples and Mosques can refuse to marry whoever they like. The government is not afforded that luxury.

    Which is the same reason a Catholic church can refuse to marry a Jewish couple, but the US government cannot.

    Allowing SSM does not hurt religious liberty in the least.


    April 30, 2009 at 3:21 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: