Is Suppressing Religious Liberty the Point of SSM Bills?


Here's something else worth noticing from Maryland and Rhode Island: In both states, gay-marriage advocates would rather lose gay marriage than provide religious liberty protections.

SSM Rally
The ACLU in Rhode Island has flatly said it would not support any kind of expanded conscience protection in Rhode Island.

The same thing happened in Maryland, by the way: no willingness to amend the bill to protect religious liberty.

What does that tell you? It tells you that for the leaders of the gay marriage movement the negative effects on religious liberty are not a side effect of gay marriage--they are the point.

Gay marriage is not about pluralism, not about live and let live, and not just about helping Adam and Steve live their life the way they want.

The leaders of the gay marriage movement WANT to use the law to reshape society so Christians and other traditional faith communities get treated like racists by our own government.

Well, not while you and I have anything to say about it, right?