Staver: SCOTUS Ruling for Marriage Equality Will Have 'A Catastrophic Consequence' for 'Human Existence'
In December, Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver told conservative radio
host Janet Parshall that a Supreme Court ruling favorable to marriage
equality “could cause another civil war” or even a second revolution. While speaking to Parshall
last week, Staver argued that the court’s decision would have “a
catastrophic consequence” for freedom, liberty and even “human
existence” itself.
The Liberty University law school dean, who said that Obama will introduce “forced homosexuality,” went on to say that the Supreme Court’s decision could lead to civil and criminal penalties for opponents of same-sex marriage, such as losing one’s job. As a result, anti-gay activists “cannot acknowledge that decision as being a legitimate one” and should treat the Supreme Court as “an illegitimate institution.”
The Liberty University law school dean, who said that Obama will introduce “forced homosexuality,” went on to say that the Supreme Court’s decision could lead to civil and criminal penalties for opponents of same-sex marriage, such as losing one’s job. As a result, anti-gay activists “cannot acknowledge that decision as being a legitimate one” and should treat the Supreme Court as “an illegitimate institution.”
If the court goes the wrong way within the next week on these issues, it will become an illegitimate institution and we should treat it as such. It is that dire. It is exactly as simple and as plain as you said it: God said marriage is between one man and one woman, and some civil institution says no it’s not. That has a catastrophic consequence for our religious freedom, for the very function of the family, for marriage, for our human existence, for civil society and for any area of our liberty, it is a catastrophic game changer and it will be more destructive than Roe v. Wade. Why? Because Roe v. Wade, as destructive as it is and it is destructive, does not force you to have an abortion. Now Obamacare is forcing us now to fund abortion. But this will not just simply say, ‘ok same-sex marriage, I don’t agree with it but I can go on and live my life,’ no. You want to work in the DOJ? You’ve got to support it. You want to work in any other area? You’ve got to endorse it. This will not be coexistence, this will not be the government’s got a bad policy, this will be the government’s got a bad policy but you must advance it, you must support it; if you don’t, you will be punished, you won’t have your job, you will be punished in some other civil or even criminal way. That’s why it’s going to be more coercive than Roe v. Wade, it is a line—I’m telling you, I’m hoping people understand this—that we cannot cross. If we cross that line, we have to push back; we cannot acknowledge that decision as being a legitimate one.
Staver: SCOTUS Ruling for Marriage Equality Will Have 'A Catastrophic Consequence' for 'Human Existence'
Submitted by Brian Tashman on Monday, 6/24/2013 1:05 PM
In December, Liberty Counsel head Mat Staver told conservative
radio host Janet Parshall that a Supreme Court ruling favorable to
marriage equality “could cause another civil war” or even a second
revolution. While speaking to Parshall last week, Staver argued that the
court’s decision would have “a catastrophic consequence” for freedom,
liberty and even “human existence” itself.
The Liberty University law school dean, who said that Obama will
introduce “forced homosexuality,” went on to say that the Supreme
Court’s decision could lead to civil and criminal penalties for
opponents of same-sex marriage, such as losing one’s job. As a result,
anti-gay activists “cannot acknowledge that decision as being a
legitimate one” and should treat the Supreme Court as “an illegitimate
institution.”
If the court goes the wrong way within the next week on these
issues, it will become an illegitimate institution and we should treat
it as such. It is that dire. It is exactly as simple and as plain as you
said it: God said marriage is between one man and one woman, and some
civil institution says no it’s not. That has a catastrophic consequence
for our religious freedom, for the very function of the family, for
marriage, for our human existence, for civil society and for any area of
our liberty, it is a catastrophic game changer and it will be more
destructive than Roe v. Wade. Why? Because Roe v. Wade, as destructive
as it is and it is destructive, does not force you to have an abortion.
Now Obamacare is forcing us now to fund abortion. But this will not just
simply say, ‘ok same-sex marriage, I don’t agree with it but I can go
on and live my life,’ no. You want to work in the DOJ? You’ve got to
support it. You want to work in any other area? You’ve got to endorse
it. This will not be coexistence, this will not be the government’s got a
bad policy, this will be the government’s got a bad policy but you must
advance it, you must support it; if you don’t, you will be punished,
you won’t have your job, you will be punished in some other civil or
even criminal way. That’s why it’s going to be more coercive than Roe v.
Wade, it is a line—I’m telling you, I’m hoping people understand
this—that we cannot cross. If we cross that line, we have to push back;
we cannot acknowledge that decision as being a legitimate one.
No comments:
Post a Comment