In a recent incident, Wyoming Judge
Ruth Neely told a reporter she wouldn’t conduct unnatural marriage ceremonies,
even though she is not required by law to perform such rites. However, just telling a reporter got her in
trouble, and she was censured by state legal authorities.
Barbara Weller, an attorney with the
National Center for Life and Liberty, tells OneNewsNow
there’s a strong need for accommodation of people with religious beliefs. “For instance,” Weller says, “if a Muslim
entertainer didn’t want to sing at an Easter sunrise service, [she] should be
accommodated for that. If a bakery was asked
to bake a cake for the Ku Klux Klan, [it] ought to be able to not do that.”
But, as Weller points out, it seems
that only Christians who have religious beliefs against same-sex ‘marriage’ are
experiencing discrimination, which she says is unconstitutional. The remedy could take one of two forms
according to Weller:
First,
President Trump could issue an executive order protecting religious freedom.
A
second option, she says, would be “a federal religious liberties bill that
would actually allow for Christians or other religious people who have an
objection to same-sex marriage to be able to become, in a sense, conscientious
objectors.
“That’s really what they are,” she
continues. “They’re just like pacifists
who don’t want to go to war, and the country’s always recognized conscientious
objectors.”
Weller stresses that such executive or
legislative action is needed to protect people from having their religious
freedom subverted by activists with social agendas.
Fact is: There are plenty of judges,
bakers, photographers, clergy, entertainers more than willing to provide their
services to same-sex ‘marriages’ … but the gay activist attacks (agenda) is
clearly on Christians of conviction.
Rev.
Dr. Kenneth L. Beale, Jr.
Chaplain
(Colonel-Ret), U.S. Army
Pastor,
Ft. Snelling Memorial Chapel
Maybe another option would be to abide by the 1st amendment as the founders meant it to be. Maybe congress could ask judges how they come up with such strange interpretations of the Constitution. I think religious freedom was meant for all. I don't always like it but if freedom is to mean anything it must be for all.
ReplyDelete