With the troubling state of things in the US, the government needs to change “Independence Day” to “Dependence Day”. Cradle to grave entitlements, Obamacare, out of control regulation, the record size and intrusiveness of government, government defined marriage, the Fed manipulation of financial markets, the IRS, the NSA, I could go on and on. Leftists in academia, the media, and the Democratic party want to control every aspect of your lives, except for sex and its consequences, of course.

So go ahead, celebrate Dependence Day this year.

Government should never be allowed to induce a private individual or a private entity to perform a service or provide a “benefit” if it violates their Constitution rights, but that is exactly what the government is attempting to do as it relates to freedom of religion. Fortunately, in the Hobby Lobby case pertaining to abortion coverage, the government lost. But the assault on religious freedom from the same-sex marriage crowd has started.

Advocates of SSM want their lifestyle to trump all other rights. They want to become THE number one protected class. They claim that failure to perform services for SSM is the same as racial discrimination, but this is categorically false. No legitimate religion argues for discrimination on the basis of race. Furthermore, the advocate of SSM has plenty of remedies. If someone won’t bake them a cake or allow a ceremony to be held at their hall, there are plenty of other options – people and businesses that will gladly serve them. Furthermore this is nothing more than a thinly-veiled attack on Christianity, especially Catholic and Evangelical churches. Funny, but I don’t see the SSM crowd asking Muslim bakers to bake them a cake, or an African-American church getting pilloried over their opposition. I can’t wait for that. There will be all kinds of unintended consequences if religious freedom is not respected and protected. What we be next, Satanists forcing Christians to serve them at their ceremonies? Muslim or Jewish caterers forced to serve pork? It is a slippery slope.

I can be agnostic on religion and still be deeply offended by the government’s overreach. At a high level, government should never have the right to infringe on a businessperson’s Constitutional freedoms, be it religion, association, speech, ect. If businesses want to turn away customers with ill intent, it will eventually hurt their bottom line.

You will never hear the word liberal used to describe the left or Democrats on this site. They have perverted the meaning of the word. They are illiberal or anti-liberal. Traditional liberalism advocated for civil liberties, political freedom, the rule of law, economic freedom and small government. Does that sound like the left today? They are as far from these ideals as they can possibly be. They are much closer to fascism than liberalism. Government intrusion, central planning, shunning the Constitution and the rule of law, seeking to muzzle opposing views. Does this sound like liberalism? And no, having the government enforce a nationwide same-sex marriage mandate is not promoting freedom. In some cases, one person’s freedom can be another’s tyranny. So let’s never refer to these people as liberals. They are leftists, or leftist-fascists.

Last week was a great one for the far-left and Obama, and a terrible one for conservatives, the Constitution, and individual liberty. I won’t dwell on the court’s tortured interpretation of “state” in the Obamacare decision. Suffice to say Roberts and the majority decided that it was for “the greater good”, Constitution be damned. Even worse was the expected ruling on same-sex marriage.

I won’t dwell on the moral aspects, as there are plenty of other reasons the narrow 5-4 majority screwed up royally. Here are the major points:

1) The court citing equal protection is dubious. In addition, marriage has always been the purview of individual states, not the federal government. The SC violated the Federalism clause and should have left this up to the democratic process. Most states had approved it anyway. I may not agree with it but I can live with popular vote or state legislatures deciding.

2) The state’s interest in promoting marriage includes having children to further the populace. This is impossible in the case of same-sex marriage.

3) Evidence was provided in amicus briefs that SSM does harm children in the rare cases where they are present. Children do better with a mother and a father, a notion that the radical left wants to destroy. The court ignored this evidence.

4) This has opened up a Pandora’s box of attacks on religious freedom, despite the denials by supporters of SSM. It is going to get ugly. Never mind the problems with natural law.

How the Supreme Court declaring same-sex marriage to be the law of the land will be used in an attempt to destroy traditional marriage, the family, and religion. It is already happening in the area of calling for polygamy and attacks on traditional Christian churches. That did not take long.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/06/26/15-reasons-marriage-equality-is-about-neither-marriage-nor-equality/

Left-wing radicals in the Obama administration will use this ruling to try to make gay rights trump religious rights and paint the religious as bigots.

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/if-gay-is-good-opposing-it-must-be-evil