[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Make no mistake: America is being torn apart. Along racial lines and along the seams of our very cultural fabric, Americans are being divided by a radical, “progressive” agenda that seeks to redefine, reprioritize and destroy aspects of our society.[/vc_column_text][banner300 banner=”5517620b381df”][vc_column_text]One such cultural redefinition is the continued persistence of the left to redefine what has always stood as a bedrock of American families: the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
Not only has the Obama Administration become increasingly hostile to those who favor this ancient understanding; they have sought to criminalize those who act in accordance with their beliefs.
Ryan Anderson at the Daily Signal explains how a simple bill could help protect millions of Americans who wish to act in accordance with their long-held religious beliefs:
In April, members of the Supreme Court asked Solicitor General Donald Verrilli, the federal government’s top lawyer, if the administration could strip religious schools that believe marriage is the union of husband and wife of their tax-exempt status should the Court redefine marriage. Verrilli responded by saying “[i]t’s certainly going to be an issue.”
Congress took the administration at its word and today introduced the First Amendment Defense Act (FADA) to guarantee such a scenario never becomes “an issue.”
This bill, introduced by Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Rep. Raul Labrador, R-Idaho, is good policy in part because it is so simple. It says that the federal government cannot discriminate against people and institutions that speak and act according to their belief that marriage is a union of one man and one woman. That’s it in a nutshell.
President Obama should support the First Amendment Defense Act given his previous stand in favor of male-female marriage, made as late as 2012, and his more recent remarks: “On an issue as sensitive as this, knowing that Americans hold a wide range of views based on deeply held beliefs, maintaining our nation’s commitment to religious freedom is also vital.”
Accordingly, government should respect those who stand for marriage and the First Amendment Defense Act would do so by specifically prohibiting bureaucrats from retaliating against individuals, family businesses, charities and schools because they refuse to change their deeply held views on what marriage is, no matter what the Supreme Court or politicians may say about it in the coming days.
Our nation was founded by religious individuals who fled the suffocating restrictions upon their faith. We must remain sensitive to the very genesis of our nation: religious liberty.
However President Obama or any government official feels about the definition of marriage, the top priority of any who swear an oath of office is to uphold and defend the Constitution and that means fanatically fighting to preserve religious liberty.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]