States move to counter gay marriage ruling

More than a dozen states that saw gay marriage bans struck down last week by the U.S.  Supreme Court are vowing to protect religious liberty, even though they grudgingly accept that the ruling is now the law of the land.

In the wake of Friday's decision, Texas’s attorney general told county clerks in the state that they have a statutory right to refuse marriage licenses to same-sex couples if they have religious objections to gay marriage.

In Alabama, state Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore — a staunch opponent of same-sex marriage — said a new state court order could temporarily delay the practice, only to walk back the remarks.

And in Louisiana, the attorney general contends there is nothing in the Supreme Court’s ruling that renders it effective immediately, raising questions about how soon the state would have to comply.

Many other states across the South and upper Midwest are criticizing the ruling as an encroachment on states’ rights and religious freedom, though most acknowledge they cannot ignore it.

"Ultimately, my position is that the state should have been legally entitled to define marriage,” South Dakota Attorney General Marty Jackley told The Hill. “I feel the state has traditionally held that role, and certainly when it's in the state's constitution it should be respected."

"But we are a nation of laws and we must respect that," he added.

Before the Supreme Court’s ruling last Friday, those states and 11 others —Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio and Tennessee — had laws prohibiting same-sex marriage.

Though not outright defying the high court’s decision, states are now seeking to make clear the limits of its scope.

“The ruling does not tell a minister or congregation what they must do, but it does make clear that the government cannot pick and choose when it comes to issuing marriage licenses and the benefits they confer,” said Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said the state would issue exemptions to county clerks, judges and justices of the peace who express religious objections to issuing gay marriage licenses, promising to "defend their religious beliefs."

“The government cannot force them to conduct same-sex wedding ceremonies over their religious objections,” Paxton said, accusing the Supreme Court of “ignoring the text and spirit of the Constitution to manufacture a right that simply does not exist.”

Continued at The Hill

South Dakota Establishment Republicans and Their Secret War Against Christians

Press Release from Peter Waldron

Peter Waldren

A wealth of evidence, to include, sworn affidavits, that document an effort by a Republican-controlled State government to suppress Christian voters is now in our possession. 

Dr. Peter Waldron states, "If South Dakota is an example of Establishment Republican rule, then I fear for the nation if a Republican-in-name-only ("RINO") is elected president in 2016."

The abundance of documented evidence collected during a three-week investigation alleges that South Dakota's Division of Criminal Investigation ("DCI") agents stalked, surveilled and visited Christian families at their homes before the all-in-important June 2014 Primary. 

Such tactics achieved its apparent goal – it scared voters away from the polls.

The anecdotal evidence points to possible coordination between the eventual winner, former governor, now US Senator Mike Rounds (SD-R) and the man he handpicked to be Attorney General, Marty Jackley. 

Furthermore, the sequence of events and circumstances surrounding the pre-primary state prosecution of Republican candidate Dr. Annette Bosworth, a popular Christian missionary and physician, are suspicious.