... But the court misunderstands Barronelle’s religious beliefs. She gladly will use her talents to celebrate any union of one man and one woman. For Barronelle, a wedding joining a man and a woman tells the truth about marriage, regardless of whether Muslims or atheists are getting married. Those events involve what is necessary to make a marriage, so Barronelle has no problem participating in those weddings. But unions of any other combination do not constitute marriages, even if they receive the imprimatur of the state.
The secular establishment remains unmoved. Isn’t her formula of marriage gerrymandered to fit her prejudice? Not at all. Barronelle’s beliefs about marriage, which reflect basic orthodox Christian teaching, are firmly rooted in her understanding of God, man, and human sexuality. Christians have understood these to be essential, profound, and interlocking truths for centuries. It is because of these great truths that many Christians object to participating in a same-sex wedding.
Natural Marriage Is Fundamental to the Faith
So Christians aren’t just coming up with their beliefs about marriage arbitrarily. Marriage, according to Scripture and church tradition, is an earthly picture of the relationship between God and his people.
There is clearly a hidden agenda underlying the movement of militant homosexuality. Wondering why no Muslim has been taken to court for refusing to service a gay wedding? Simple. The militant homosexual movement is licking its chops at the thought of finally vanquishing from the public square its perennial thorn-in-the-side ....... orthodox Christianity.
In 2013, Stephen Beale wrote,
In 2006, a noted advocate for traditional marriage, Maggie Gallagher, warned that the legalization of same-sex marriage would lead to constraints on religious freedom. Writing in the Weekly Standard, Gallagher saw the end of adoptions services by Boston Catholic Charities as a foreshadowing of things to come. (To retain its license, Gallagher explained, the agency would have to abide by the state’s anti-discrimination law, which had been extended to married same-sex couples.) She couched her warning in the form of a question:
This March, then, unexpectedly, a mere two years after the introduction of gay marriage in America, a number of latent concerns about the impact of this innovation on religious freedom ceased to be theoretical. How could Adam and Steve’s marriage possibly hurt anyone else? When religious-right leaders prophesy negative consequences from gay marriage, they are often seen as overwrought. The First Amendment, we are told, will protect religious groups from persecution for their views about marriage. So who is right? Is the fate of Catholic Charities of Boston an aberration or a sign of things to come?
Seven years later, we have the answer: as of this writing, there have been at least 11 instances of wedding vendors and venues facing some form of recrimination—threats, boycotts, protests, and the intervention of state or judicial authorities—because they denied services for gay nuptials because of their faith.
... These cases represent a new battlefield in the clash between the freedoms of Christians and the “radical homosexual agenda,” said Richard Thompson, President and Chief Counsel of The Thomas Moore Law Center. “Despite their relatively small numbers, radical homosexuals wield enormous power. They dominate our cultural elite, Hollywood, television, the mainstream news media, public schools, academia, and a significant portion of the judiciary,” Thompson said in an e-mail interview. “As a result of their power, homosexual activists are able to intimidate and silence opposition.”
What is transpiring is in fact the triumph of sexual "license" over religious freedom. In 2013, Berkley professor of Sociology Claude Fischer documented here the growing sexual license in his blog entitled "Sexual license, sexual limits". In May 2016, David French noted here the devastatingly high cost of sexual license. As he concludes, "For those who understand biblical truth, the notion of slavery to sin is hardly new — and it turns out that redefining sin as freedom doesn’t make the slavery or sorrow any less real."
The sexual revolution which was birthed in the 60s, has borne mature fruit tragically laying waste countless lives and families.