Same-sex marriages begin hours after Supreme Court order

Same-sex couples in Utah, Oklahoma, Virginia, Indiana, and Wisconsin began applying for marriage licenses less than four hours after the U.S. Supreme Court refused on Monday to hear appeals in cases challenging the states’ laws defining marriage as between one man and one woman. The ruling means six more states—Colorado, North Carolina, South Carolina, Kansas, West Virginia, and Wyoming—could soon have to abandon their marriage protection laws as well.

Rather than wait for word from the appeals court, Colorado Attorney General John Suthers ordered the state’s 64 county clerks to begin immediately issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples.

The Supreme Court ruling continues to trend on the Internet as thousands of people weigh in on both sides of the debate. While same-sex supporters applaud the move as a major step forward, Christians and conservatives call the decision a blow to good government and healthy marriage culture in America.

“This is an unfortunate setback for sound constitutional self-government and a setback for a healthy marriage culture,” wrote Ryan Anderson, a fellow at The Heritage Foundation, on The Daily Signal. “The truth of the matter is that the marriage laws in these five states—as in many states across our nation—are good laws that reflect the truth about marriage.”

Anderson contends the Supreme Court should have reviewed the cases and upheld the authority of voters and their elected representatives to make good marriage policies. Even as people are free to redefine marriage to include same-sex relationships, Anderson said, so should they have liberty to maintain the historic definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman: “Nothing less than the future of our society and the course of the constitutional government in the United States are at stake.”

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, called the SCOTUS ruling “judicial activism at its worst” in a statement that accuses the justices of imposing their policy preferences to circumvent the judgments of democratically elected legislatures. Cruz, a lawyer by training, contends no language in the Constitution allows the court to redefine marriage. He vowed to introduce a constitutional amendment to bar both the federal government and the courts from overturning state marriage laws.

“The Supreme Court’s decision to let rulings by lower court judges stand that redefine marriage is both tragic and indefensible,” Cruz said.

The Texas senator’s sentiments are echoed by other conservatives who are concerned about the ruling’s detrimental implications.

“This judicially led effort to force same sex ‘marriage’ on people will have negative consequences for our Republic, not only as it relates to natural marriage but also undermining the rule of and respect for law,” said Tony Perkins, president of The Family Research Council, in a statement.

Perkins warned that as more states are forced to redefine marriage—“contrary to nature and directly in conflict with the will of millions”—Americans will experience increased attacks on their religious freedom. School curriculum will change to contradict the morals that parents are teaching their children, and more people will lose their livelihoods for refusing to not just tolerate, but celebrate, same-sex marriage.

“Congress should respond to today’s announcement by moving forward with the State Marriage Defense Act, which is consistent with last year’s Windsor ruling and ensures the federal government in its definition of marriage respects the duly enacted marriage laws of the states,” he said.

But Russell Moore, president of the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, cautioned Christians against responding to the Supreme Court’s decision with a “siege mentality” or by jettisoning a Christian sexual ethic.

“Let’s love our gay and lesbian neighbors,” he told The Christian Post. “Let’s move forward with persuasion and with confidence. This is no time for retreat or for resentment. This is a time for mission.”