SUPREME COURT - FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO MARRY v. RELIGIOUS LIBERTY

SCOTUS, April 28, 2015 - Obergefell v. Hodges – Oral Arguments
By Mario Gonzalez Jr., J.D.

I am a hardcore Mets fan. Stands to reason, in light of the fact that I always root for the underdog. But on occasion during a Mets game, regardless of how optimistic I might have been coming to the game, there comes a point where my team’s lackluster performance causes me to make the decision to leave the game early to beat the traffic. Staying to witness the slaughter is just too heartbreaking. This is exactly how I felt hearing John J. Bursch’s oral argument for the respondent states yesterday.

In a word, his argument was convoluted. Not only so, but it was more than likely grossly ineffective at changing anyone’s mind. Even when Justice Scalia threw Bursch a lifesaver trying to redirect him toward making a case for undergirding historical state sovereignty in regulating marital affairs, Bursch was unable to grab hold of it to save himself. When asked why a fundamental right such as the right to marry (marriage itself flowing from a broader fundamental ‘right to privacy’ implicit in the Due Process Clause, Zablocki v. Redhail, 434 U.S. 374 (1978)) should be made available to all but one class of people, namely those with same-sex attractions, Bursch wasted valuable court time by hopelessly trying to convince the court that the state’s primary interest in limiting marriage to heterosexual couples was based on the state’s compelling interest in promoting and controlling the nuclear family structure because of issues associated with procreation. Choosing this angle of argumentation to justify what would be the apparent denial of a fundamental right to a particularized group seemed unbelievably shallow and ill conceived to me. Let me say that in English - it was just dumb. As you can expect, the argument was literally gutted by the court, as it should have been. That said, John seems to get it together toward the end of his presentation. Until then, it appears that he had lost the Court. The prudent angle of attack, as hinted at by Scalia, should have revolved around outlining the likely havoc that an equal protection holding based on sexual orientation in this case would indirectly have on the state’s ability to decide its own destiny regarding the control of marriage within its boundaries – a control that they have had since the Constitution was forged and that is now, at least in terms of who can marry, being taken away. The second argument should have been the effect that such a holding would have on a citizen’s constitutionally protected religious liberty interests. The appellants actually publicly conceded that private religious schools could well be denied tax exemption by the holding in this case, should a school’s historic, biblical, and deeply held religious convictions force them to now allegedly discriminate against what would likely then be considered a “protected class” based on same-sex attraction. Beyond that, simply voicing the religious beliefs held by many orthodox religious people of many faiths on homosexuality itself might soon well be regarded as “hate speech” – a form of speech unprotected by the First Amendment – even on a pulpit. In short, religious organizations holding to traditional views on marriage are about to face the challenge of their lives.

As anticipated, the Loving and Windsor decisions were respectively shoved down respondent’s throat. The respondent’s arguments here were so bad that I actually found them really hard to listen to. I mentally got up and went to the imaginary parking lot in my head to beat traffic. A holding in favor of the states here would require no less than an act of God.

THE SECRET FORMULA FOR IMMEDIATE CHURCH GROWTH

You asked and here's your answer. If you adhere to the following simple principles meticulously, you will grow. It's really as simple as that. Jesus is coming soon so we can't waste any more time.

Think ONE-HAND. Five (5) fingers:
(1) Participation (everyone); (2) Training (hands-on); (3) Evangelism (friendship) ; (4) Miracles (expect), (5) People (emphasis - "Feed my sheep/lambs")

1.    Adherent participation | Put Everybody to work - Involved people both feel a part of the church and multiply themselves! This is pivotal. Don't let anyone just sit there. Even a new convert can do something (arrange chairs, help with the food pantry, construction, etc.)

2.    Emphasis on ministerial training. This is best done cyclically - Intellectual/empirical training followed by practical application. People really learn most by doing, so cycle study & practical ministry. Practice what you learned immediately after learning it. Here's the flow (1) study an area, (2) practice what you learned in that area,  then (3) study next area and so forth.

3.    Focus on growth (evangelism) rather than maintenance. The people that you spend the most time "ministering to" are typically the first to leave. They will suck you dry and then go on to kill the next guy. Concentrating on maintenance will stunt growth. "Getting by" is simply unacceptable. The word "maintenance" is not in God's vocabulary. We are called to be "fruitful," not simply to exist. We must line up our actual practices with our objectives. Ask yourself, "Is what I'm doing helping me to DIRECTLY achieve my objective? If not, rethink what you are doing and adapt it until it does, or just stop dead in your tracks and regroup. Keep asking yourself, "What am I here for? What is our purpose? What is my specific part in helping to move the church toward achieving that purpose personally?” You must stay true to your mission. If you reach the lost, everything else will follow. Everything you do (your worship, your word, your teaching) must serve to reach the lost.

4.    Depend on and expect the miraculous. He said, "these signs WILL FOLLOW," not that they "might" follow. People have to get healed and delivered. Public testimonies are essential to growth. People need to see the hand of God. The dragon is overcome by the blood of the Lamb and the word of our testimony. We must emphasize the miraculous. 

5.    Focus resources on people rather than buildings. The building can't outweigh the ministry. Build the church!! The church will take care of the building. We can’t build at the expense of evangelism. 

“ANTI-SEMITIC” IS AN INADEQUATE TERM FOR WHAT THIS ADMINISTRATION IS SHOWING TOWARD ISRAEL - Mario Gonzalez Jr., J.D.

Newsflash – Israel’s interests are America’s interests. Entertaining an agreement with Iran that could result in setting up for a modern-day nuclear holocaust in Israel, being that Iran has made no qualms about their quite public and fervent desire to annihilate Israel, quite frankly goes beyond anti-Semitic behavior.  What the U.S. is demonstrating toward Israel requires a new term - one that more aptly describes the seemingly deep-seated loathing that this President has toward our most faithful ally.

For this administration to say through their politically savvy State Department spokeswoman, Marie Harf (now infamously known for her “ISIS needs jobs” solution to the current Islamic genocide we are observing all over the Middle East), that “This is an agreement that is only about the nuclear issue…This is an agreement that doesn’t deal with any other issues, nor should it,” is deeply offensive and dismissive of the love and concern that the United States has toward the people of Israel and its historic commitment to their protection.  Israel’s national interests must be at the very core of any contemplated agreement with Iran. To ignore this fact demonstrates a mindset completely at odds with the sentiments of the American people.

PEDOPHILIA IS NOT A CRIME?

Neither is having homicidal thoughts - that is, until those thoughts turn into a plan. This is how we can arrest people preparing to execute a radical Islamic murderous plot before they actually kill people. Unfortunately, pedophiles don't give us much advance warning before they perpetrate their life altering crimes.

As is usually the case with these academic theorists, they separate the thought from the action and then seek a sympathetic ear for those beset by this criminal mindset. Now it would seem they are going much further. Academics in a recent conference at the University of Cambridge (England) publicly stated, "Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males.” They went on to conclude, “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.” Are you kidding me? If this had been said specifically about gay men the liberal media would have set these people on fire. Some group would doubtless have picketed the university. Yet it appears to be okay to say this about men as a whole, most of which are heterosexual.

When will society come to its collective senses and realize the plot being executed to disparage our moral convictions and vilify conservatives, particularly those in our communities of faith, at the expense of our children?

"This thinking is really a European thing..." Really? Here it is in living color at my daughter's school, Rutgers University, right here in good ol' NJ, U.S.A.. This continues to happen while the Church is comfortably, as Keith Green would say, "asleep in the light." It's time for all of us to wake up and smell the coffee.

http://www.phillymag.com/news/2014/10/06/pedophilia-not-a-crime-rutgers-margo-kaplan/#dqTZRhC2Mb4oTDi2.01

ON WOMEN IN MINISTRY - IN CHRIST, SEX DISCRIMINATION AND RACIAL AND SOCIAL DISTINCTIONS ARE ABOLISHED

Women at Corinth prayed and prophesied publicly. The issue at Corinth which Paul raised was not the right of women to pray and prophesy in public, but only the proper manner in which it should be done (1 Corinthians 11:4, 5, 16-18) in the light of prevailing customs. His counsel, "Judge in yourselves (v. 13), and his statement that neither he nor the churches of God had any such custom (v. 16) if any were contentious or disputatious, indicate he did not look upon the head covering as a binding moral obligation. This is in harmony with Paul’s motivation to be all things to all men for God’s glory and the salvation of lost humanity (1 Corinthians 9:19-23; 10-27-33; Romans 14:1-23), and at the same not flaunting his liberty in external matters (1 Corinthians 8:9; 10:23).

Paul’s prohibition of women speaking does not relate to a ministry. The key to Paul’s meaning in 1 Corinthians 14:34 in enjoining silence upon women in the churches is found in the immediate context. It refers to women benefiting or learning from what is taking place in the church and not to a public ministry for women, which the Scriptures elsewhere affirm. Paul says, "If they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home." This is directly related to the statement, "for it is a shame (literally, indecorous) for women to speak in the church" (1 Corinthians 14:35). This is in the context of Paul’s correction of disorder and confusion in the church (v. 33), which undoubtedly resulted from the women being segregated from the men and their undisciplined manner of speaking out publicly and causing a disturbance. It is also clear from the text that the subjection of the women is primarily to their own husbands, since they were to ask their husbands at home if they wanted to learn anything.

Paul recognized women in ministry roles. In Romans 16:1, 2, Phoebe, the bearer of the letter Paul wrote to the Roman Christians from Corinth, is called "a servant (literally, ’minister’ or ’deacon’ from the Greek, diakonos) of the church which is at Cenchrea." She is also called "a succorer (Greek, prostates, ’a protectress’) of many, and of myself also." The meaning is "one who stands before, a front rank person, chief, leader."

Another one whom Paul greets is Priscilla and her husband Aquila (Romans 16:3-5). Paul calls them his "helpers (Greek, sunergos,–"fellow workers’) in Christ Jesus," a term applied to Timothy (Romans 16:21) and others of Paul’s companions in the ministry (Philemon 24). Priscilla was probably the most prominent and capable n ministry, since in four of the six times they are mentioned her name stands first. They taught Apollos (Acts 18:26) and opened their home as a meeting place for the church (Romans 16:5; 1 Corinthians 16:19).

Among others to whom Paul sends greetings are Junia and Andronicus, "who are of note among (the Greek preposition is en, which denotes ’fixed position’) the apostles" (Romans 16:7). Chrysotom and many prominent commentators were of the opinion Paul considered Junia as an apostle.Tryphaena, Tryphosa, and the beloved Persis are commended for their "labor in the Lord" (Romans 16:12). Paul elsewhere refers to Apphia, in whose house there was a church (Philemon 2), and to Euodias, Syntyche, and other women who were fellow-workers with Paul and struggled with him in the gospel (Philippians 4:2, 3). Lydia was prominent in the church at Philippi (Acts 16:12-16, 40).

Paul’s instruction to Timothy does not impose absolute silence on women. The opening expression in 1 Timothy 1:9-15, "in like manner also," indicates a link with men praying "everywhere" and emphasizes the proper attire and decorum of women who engage in public prayer. This is in harmony with what Paul stated about proper decorum for Corinthian women who prayed and prophesied in public (1 Corinthians 11:2-16).

That the husband-wife relationship is primarily in focus is evident in the transition in verse 11 from the plural to the singular, "man" and "woman," which terms can properly be translated "husband" and "wife." This is further evident in the reference to Adam and Eve, the first married couple, and also the reference in verse 15 to childbearing. The woman’s subjection is primarily to her husband, which corresponds with the parallel passage in 1 Corinthians 14:35, 35.

In both instances the reference does not pertain to women with a God-given maturity. It refers to bold women who are unqualified and who wrongfully attempt to teach and domineer over their husbands and others. Instead they need to submit and learn with respectful and modest decorum. Since Paul forbids the woman of whom he speaks to"usurp authority over" (Greek, authenteo, meaning "to act of oneself, to domineer over") the man, she is arrogating to herself a position in authority to which she is not entitled and a function in teaching for which she is not qualified or properly recognized.

The silence enjoined upon the woman cannot mean muteness. It comes from the Greek word hesuchia, which means "quietness, tranquility, absence of disturbance." The same word is translated "quiet" in 1 Timothy 2:2 where it refers to the manner or spirit in which prayer is to be offered. Its occurrence in 2 Thessalonians 3:11, 12 and 1 Peter 3:4 confirms this meaning.

In Christ there is neither male nor female. Paul indicates in Galatians 3:28 that in Christ sex discrimination and racial and social distinctions are abolished. Manifestations of the Spirit and ministry gifts are bestowed upon all members of Christ’s body (Romans 12:1-8, 1 Corinthians 12:1-31; Ephesians 4:1-16) with no distinction as to sex. Likewise all believers, both men and women, are made priests unto God (1 peter 2:4-10; Revelation 1:6; 5:10; 20:4, 6) and as such have a ministry in service and the offering up of spiritual sacrifices to the entire household of faith (1 Peter 2:5; Hebrews 3:6).

From Me2You

Pastor Mario