“Religions that reject, in their moral teaching, homosexual acts and same-sex marriage will indeed be marked, in their defining character, as groups no longer ‘in accord with public policy.’” Hadley Arkes
“Only two things will be required…to deny tax exemptions to churches and religious schools that do not accord with the new orthodoxy on marriage and sexuality: (1) the orchestration of a campaign of complaints directed to the IRS and (2) an IRS sufficiently complaisant to churn out the decision that the administration and its allies so evidently want.” Ibid
Editor’s note: Back in 1977 I wrote The Homosexual Revolution that depicts, describes, and predicts nearly everything that is happening today. Even then, however, I did not see the movement for same-sex marriage. Hence, as Ryan Anderson notes in his upcoming work The Future of Marriage and Religious Freedom, homosexual activists “intend to cast supporters of traditional marriage once and for all as bigots who won’t be allowed to make their case in the public square.”
The endgame of the culture war.
Hadley Arkes, The Weekly Standard, June 22, 2015, Vol. 20, No. 39
June, for conservatives, has been of late the “cruelest month” at the Supreme Court, as the decisions finally roll forth. Many expect—with a combination of apprehension and resignation—that in the critical case of Obergefell v. Hodges, Justice Anthony Kennedy will furnish the fifth vote for installing same-sex marriage as a constitutional right. But already, during the oral argument in the case in April, the solicitor general, Donald Verrilli, set off tremors in the land when Justice Samuel Alito raised the question of the precedent in the 1983 case of Bob Jones University.
In that case, the Court held that the IRS was justified in witholding tax-exempt status from a fundamentalist Christian school because its policies on race were “not in accord with public policy.” The school had abandoned a policy of refusing to admit black students, but it retained a policy of barring, to its students, dating and marriage across racial lines. When Justice Alito raised the possible relevance of this case, the solicitor general did not dismiss the dark possibilities here. He drew wide attention simply by saying, “I don’t think I can answer that question without knowing more specifics, but it’s certainly going to be an issue.” As the line went, they would have to look into it. Continue reading