The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops Condemns SCOTUS Same-Sex Marriage Ruling

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has come out against the Supreme Court ruling that says all States must marry people regardless of gender.

The ruling cited the 14th Amendment and did not mention churches or religion that I know of.

Could be a gray area has been created.

And a coalition of African-American pastors also came out 'against' the ruling before it was even handed down.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have publicly come out against the Supreme Court's decision today ruling that same-sex "marriage" is a constitutional right, calling the decision a "tragic error" that will "harm the common good and most vulnerable among us."

Written by USCCB president Abp. Joseph E. Kurtz of Louisville, Kentucky, the statement makes no concessions and condemns the decision from start to finish, arguing that the definition of marriage will always be rooted in Catholic truth and the teachings of Our Lord Jesus Christ no matter what five unelected justices tell us to think. Statement below:

BREAKING—USCCB Condemns Ruling

A coalition of African-American pastors vowed this week that there will be massive civil disobedience if the U.S. Supreme Court legalizes same-sex marriage in a ruling on the matter expected this month.

At a press conference in Memphis, Tennessee, members of the Coalition of African-American Pastors joined Christian ministers at the Church of God in Christ’s historic Mason Temple to warn the Obama administration to prepare for massive civil disobedience among pastors and clergy if state bans on gay marriage are deemed unconstitutional.

‘WE WILL NOT STAND BACK': Black Pastors Vow Civil Disobedience In Gay Marriage Ruling

uhmm...who cares?

If jesus really existed he would be rolling on is cloud, equality and love won today.

Right. So what?
Why does the Catholic Church still think of itself as relevant?

a reply to: xuenchen

i find this claim most interesting

will "harm the....................... most vulnerable among us."

an admission of the insecurity of the religious ?

originally posted by: jimmyx
uhmm...who cares?

The gays do, and the Catholics and Southern Baptists will likely be among the first to have gay couples demand to be married in their churches.

a reply to: xuenchen

Don't give a crap what they think.
How dare they moan about this when thousands of kids have suffered because they got molested by priests and then they cover iy up.
Feck em.
Equality and humanity 1
Religions of hate 0.

a reply to: ketsuko

Not sure you understand the win of today, it has nothing to do with forcing churches to marry gays, its a win for love and equality, you know the stuff jesus talked about.

Is this the end of the Pope 'bandwagon' on ATS?

He has gained a lot of support from the secularists here.

Has the 'Vicar' made a pronouncement on this subject yet?

a reply to: xuenchen

In other news... The Vatican reiterates that Galileo's heresy will continue to piss off the invisible hand that is oddly impotent.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: ketsuko

Not sure you understand the win of today, it has nothing to do with forcing churches to marry gays, its a win for love and equality, you know the stuff jesus talked about.

You simply haven't been paying attention to the writing on the wall. Either that or you are only looking at what Thomas Sowell calls "two dimensional" thinking. Cause/Effect.

On the surface, that's what the ruling would seem to be, but underneath, they labeled marriage a "civil right" which means that if anyone refuses to marry a same sex couple, they have violated a civil right. That means a gay couple can indeed go to a church (or mosque or synagogue) and demand to be married. If the church refuses, they are violating a new civil right which they can then be prosecuted under law for.

If you think people will simply respect religious feelings now, I don't think you have been paying attention.

End your tax exemptions or shut your face

originally posted by: Mandroid7
End your tax exemptions or shut your face

And if they end their tax exemption, then they are subject to tax law which means Congress has made a law respecting religion, now hasn't it? That would seem to be in violation of the 1st Amendment.

a reply to: ketsuko

Its a 2 way street, respect is earned, and churches wont be forced to mary same sex couples, so plz stop with making stuff up to prove your point.

You should be proud that your country decided that love and equality rules the day.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: ketsuko

Its a 2 way street, respect is earned, and churches wont be forced to mary same sex couples, so plz stop with making stuff up to prove your point.

You should be proud that your country decided that love and equality rules the day.

Give it up. I don't give a rip what the gays do. They can go off and marry for all I care, but the history of the issue here is simple. They don't want to live and let live. They want revenge, so they won't leave it alone.

Basically, most of the gay rights movement is and has been a bait and switch as acknowledged by activists themselves.

a reply to: ketsuko

Give what up, you trying to paint yourself a victim, when all people where looking for was equality in the eye of the law, nobody is stoping you from your outrage.

originally posted by: dukeofjive696969
a reply to: ketsuko

Give what up, you trying to paint yourself a victim, when all people where looking for was equality in the eye of the law, nobody is stoping you from your outrage.

You are trying to make me defend myself instead of answering my arguments. Give it up.

Either answer the points or desist and admit you have nothing to say.

a reply to: ketsuko

What point, your making stuff up cause your mad, what should i answer, that gays will destroy churches and force priest to marry them.

Seriously stop playing the victim game, today is a win for love and equality, thats about it.

So keep up the fake outrage, making stuff up to paint yourself as a victim when this decision dosent affect you in any way.

a reply to: ketsuko

I think if they want to change policy, they should get a little skin in the game, don't you?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

The most vulnerable among us?
Surely not the children that have been systematically raped, and abused by Catholic priests for centuries?
Surely not the unwed mothers, and orphans who were enslaved in laundries, and industrial schools?

As I said, they are irrelevant.