The right has tried to make it seem as if only they get to have a say in religion. It's obvious that not only people on the right are people of faith.

be no 'quote marks' around religious freedom because that is exactly what is being denied. UCC congregations have long been leaders in equality and inclusion. Rev Guess, he's my kind of Reverend.

Their headline : North Carolina clergy challenge gay marriage ban, citing religious freedom.
No marks.

From other cases which are going on (or decided)

Windsor: http://freemarry.3cdn.net/194d6f6342606d0ef5_ohm6bh11a.pdf
Kitchen v. Herbert (Utah) http://www.nclrights.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/2014.03.04.-Episcopal-Diocese-of-UT-Other-Religious-Orgs-Amicus.pdf

(I played a small role in both of those briefs, as part of the reviewing committee for one of the faith groups)

Religion has no voice in this matter one way or the other. While Churches may perform weddings the marriage certificate is a State form with a State certified signature on it.

They certify the legality of the union. So if the state is saying they can only perform ceremonies for some people, based on some arbitrary "religious" groups' opinion, without taking into account other religious opinions.... I think it's clever and hope it's successful.

You have to read some of these things very carefully .
This particular suit is to overturn the ban on same-sex marriages: a GOOD thing for those in same-sex relationships who want to marry.

The right SCREAMS about how gubberment should not be interfering in religion ...

If a church wants to recognize same sex marriages why should the government interfere in that?

This is a way for democrats and liberals to get into the protecting religious rights ...

Everyone else is a heathen who should be oppressed until they convert, the way Gawd intended.

But, this is a gimme to use one of their frames against them, and to muddle that particular bullshit up a bit ...

If I were a democrat and asked about it, that would be my position, "I believe in a very high level of religious freedom, and the government has no business telling churches who they can and can't marry ..."

All of the Churches and individuals who, from a religious perspective, believe in marriage equality are being denied their equal rights. That's blatantly obvious.

We can not allow religion to dictate what is permissible.

that support gay marriage to put the lie to the other side's claims that they represent the only religious viewpoint.

But the idea that religions can claim religious freedom to challenge laws is not something I would like to see encouraged.

I dont like it when hobby lobby tries to do it and though I agree with gay marriage being a right I dont like it when this church is claiming religious freedom either.

my small western Nebraska town announced several years ago it would perform gay marriages. It was my mother-in-law's church, and she said that when the pastor announced it to the congregation, a few members got up and walked out, and some others said they'd find another church before they'd condone the marriage of freaks. I asked my mother-in-law what she was going to do, accept it and stay, or find a bigoted church. She said "Why, accept it and stay, of course. It's the ones who are leaving who are freaks."

at least it better not.

Too easy to clam your religion lets you do anything you please. My religion believes in drowning puppies....


The supreme court needs to end this once and for all and allow gay marriage. This case has the potential to do more harm than good IMHO.

The argument is functionally no different from the religious freedom claims made by conservatives and in the judicial system, the functionality of the argument and not just the specific circumstance is important for examining and establishing precedent.

Frankly, I don't want church members trying to be plaintiffs in this type of case because they don't carry standing. Just like their conservative counterparts.