Despite how pleased we were with the Supreme Court's decision on same-sex marriage, in many states, members of the LGBTQ community are still at risk of losing their jobs for their sexual orientation, lack protection from physical violence, or are denied rights to hospital visits with ill spouses.
If you really believe doing your job is against your faith, then quitting would be an act of faith. Defying the law so two people you will never see again can't get married? Not so much.
A recent LGBT victory in the US Supreme Court brought marriage equality to every state in our nation. But it still comes as news to many Americans that if you are gay, you can still be fired in many jurisdictions in this country.
The marriage movement basically packaged things up in a way that was appealing to straight people, because the major gay groups working in the marriage movement attempted to make us appear as heteronormative as possible.
I guess my hope was that the picture, from a straight couple's wedding, would legitimize my relationship too. I guess somehow I was seeking approval and permission to talk about my life the way that everyone else talks about his or hers.
Taking seriously the slippery slope argument, Macedo makes a persuasive case, rooted in democratic principles and social reality, for distinguishing polygamy from same-sex marriage.
While I shed tears of joy on Supreme Court marriage day, a whole new doom cloud of fears set in. Now that marriage is law of the land, us gays were going to start to feel some of the same stupid social pressures everyone else did. Cue the headache.
There I stood, a young LGBT man and student of theology whose task was to convey God's love and affirmation of same-sex love to people of faith and no faith.
There are strong families and there are traditional families. Sometimes they exist in the same households, and these should be applauded. But sometimes they do not, and sometimes the strong families, the families with love, for both spouse and offspring, are the new ones. We should support both these good families.
Megyn Kelly asked Governor Kasich: "If you had a son or daughter who was gay or lesbian, how would you explain to them your opposition to same-sex marriage?" Kasich's answer boiled down to an affirmation of traditional marriage and the admission that he would continue to love his daughters "if one of them happened to be that." To be clear, he truly said "that."
The justices serve up a healthy portion of civil equality for everyone to digest. Some people will complain about having been forcibly fed this meal, while others will swallow and move on with their lives knowing that their well being matters.
Many say the right wing has an inferior sense of humor, and I guess it's only logical that the political right are not up for a laugh. After all, their politicians are the first to slash arts from the budget.
Bishop , we might totally disagree on this. I'm decisively pro-inclusion. That said, we are still brothers in Christ. And, I have to be honest, my white elders -- evangelical men and fellow travelers in your generation -- remain silent or straight up antagonistic about these matters.
The most pressing threat to constitutionally limited government today is not "judicial activism" but reflexive judicial deference to the political branches.
In our modern world has the Supreme Court one upped all Catholicism, by showing more reason, compassion and understanding of gays? Has the Supreme Court taken the place of the Church, exhibiting more humanity than she?
When was the first government-recognized same-sex marriage in the United States? It wasn't 2015, when the Supreme Court ruled. Or 2004, when Massachusetts became the first state to recognize marriages for LGBTs. It wasn't in the 80s or 90s, when various cities began offering limited domestic partnerships.