DeBoer v. Snyder — Amicus Brief opposing homosexual marriage

April 6, 2015 @

Attached is the DeBoer amicus brief opposing homosexual marriage, being
filed today in the U.S. Supreme Court. You can select the following link to read what transpired.

DeBoer Public Advocate amicus brief

11 Comments → “DeBoer v. Snyder — Amicus Brief opposing homosexual marriage”

  1. dave

    5 years ago

    Once again, it’s NOT “homosexual” marriage, it’s “Same-Sex-Marriage” that we’re fighting against.

  2. Virginia Nordin

    5 years ago

    Marriage is one man and one woman. Homosexuals can have a Union, not a marriage. Design their own ceremony. Stop trying to change heterosexual marriage.

  3. justjammin

    5 years ago

    Too bad we are once again dividing our country. No one is trying to change heterosexual marriage. But being against “same sex marriage” is a religious belief and in this country we still have freedom OF and freedom FROM religion. You would think Christians of ALL people would be more understanding.

  4. oneLordwon

    5 years ago

    Justjammin, curious why you think “Christians of ALL people, should be more understanding? Why? Because you think we should have no values? No moral compass? Because we have not been taught what is and is not good for us physically and spiritually? FYI: Christians are supposed to be TRUTH Sharers. They are not to tolerate sin in the camp. They are supposed to be SALT and Not Complacent Sheep and yet doing it all with the right heart for the right reasons.
    But alas, we are here because Christians have done little to uphold the Life of Christ, live up to and keep the Laws of the 10 Commandments, The laws given us in the Word to keep us spiritually well.
    Jesus came to FULFILL THE LAW, but not one dot or tittle was to pass away from it. However being a Christian means you honor and obey His Word, His directions and you do it because you make HIM first in all you do.
    Christians fail just like everyone else. They are simply forgiven sinners saved by grace and mercy. They recognize they are sinners and sometimes, they continue to sin, because they aren’t perfect, but are in process.
    The homosexual life style is one chosen by people who disregard all religions histories, disregard acceptance as being a normal lifestyle and disregard what the word of God says about that activity and choice.
    We think the act is sin as are other sins, but can be over come as in growing and becoming more like Christ in all things and especially in obedience. It’s about loving the Sinner and hating the sin, whatever that sin is which all boils down to disobedience.
    However free will is free will. We were all given it in our hearts and tend to implement it in our lives. There fore we all make decisions and you are making yours. You have chosen to ignore what the word of God says and act as if it doesn’t matter. It does, but it’s a choice we all make.
    One day we will all find out if we are right or wrong. One day we will all find out if what we did and didn’t do will affect us. One day we will all be asked: What did we do with Jesus and if we aren’t asked then it won’t matter. However if we are, it will matter a lot, because all of the other things that are ignored by sinners (all of us) we will have to be accountable for them.
    Christ is the propitiation for our sins, our grace and mercy covering and without Him being our cover and shield, we will miss out on a very great promise.

  5. JanetVarin

    5 years ago

    Justjammin, I’m echoing my brother or sister in Christ above, we ‘ve all been given free will to choose good or evil although when we were created, God claimed His creation was “good”! Therefore, we innately know right from wrong, but along our growing up years, we’re tainted by “worldly views”. However, God’s Word, the Bible & Jesus, our Lord never change….they are the same yesterday, today & tomorrow. Heb 13:8 We’re all sinners & nothing we can do will ever change that, however, there is a life-changing difference between Christians & non-believers:
    Christians= sinners, forgiven claiming Christ as their master,enjoying eternal life!
    Non-believers= sinners, unforgiven claiming ? as their master,condemned to eternal hell!
    The other side(non-believers)won’t be satisfied until everyone is forced to bend their knee at the altar of moral relativism! But please understand a Christian’s moral compass isn’t built to bend from God’s holy & inerrant Word. I’d invite you to read I Cor.6:9-10 for a glimpse of Christ’s view of homosexuality. Meanwhile I’ll be praying for peace in your life as you’re seeking the truth.

  6. oneLordwon

    5 years ago


    • Our Phones – Wireless

    • Cooking – Fireless

    • Cars – Keyless

    • Food – Fatless

    • Tires –Tubeless

    • Dress – Sleeveless

    • Youth – Jobless

    • Leaders – Shameless

    • Relationships – Meaningless

    • Attitudes – Careless

    • Babies – Fatherless

    • Feelings – Heartless

    • Education – Valueless

    • Children – Manner less

    • Country – Godless

    We are SPEECHLESS, Government is CLUELESS,

    And our Politicians are WORTHLESS!
    That’s the eulogy of America

  7. Gerald

    5 years ago

    • Neither the U.S. Constitution nor any state constitutions make LGBT people a protected class; the courts may strike down state laws banning homosexual activities under the equal protection and due process clauses, but the courts say nothing about LGBT people being a protected class.
    • Religious freedoms are a “right” in every constitution within the United States (the U.S. Constitution is the law of the land) and cannot be changed; laws created through the federal or state legislatures that prohibit discrimination of LGBT people are “privileges” granted by the state that may be changed by the next elected legislature.
    • “Rights” trump “privileges” when they are in conflict such as the ‘right’ to freedom of religion in not associating with LGBT individuals verses a legislated ‘privilege’ of having a prohibition against discrimination of LGBT people.
    • In religion, and especially Christianity, God commands through the Bible to love one another as one would love one’s self; but to resist sin, and not associate with those who commit such sin.
    • We have all sinned and are all sinners and have come short of the glory of God; so we must strive to avoid sin and sinful people but show those people how they are sinning and what to do to also avoid that sinful situation. We do not force our beliefs on other because religion must come voluntarily through free will. We do not hate LGBT people, nor are we homophobic or bigoted toward them; nor do we seek physical punishment for LGBT people; neither do we consider ourselves holier than they are.
    • Love for one’s fellow human being cannot be used by another who continuously sins against God’s law as justification to continue in that sin at the destruction of that person or other persons; but although we must continue to love that destructive person, we must disassociate ourselves from the sinner who will not cease from continuing that lifestyle – and such love is done as “tough love.”
    • Freedom of religion by a business owner in not catering to LGBT couples is not discrimination because, in the owner’s sincerely held religious belief, homosexuality is an objectionable religion-based sin. And for the LGBT person that exhibits continuous and hardened sinful homosexual ways, the business owner must reject that person in order to please God, but still must treat the LGBT person with love and compassion, in the form of “tough love,” who continue to choose homosexuality; such “tough love” of non-association by rejection is not “evil” discrimination.
    • Not performing a service for the LGBT is not the point; the point is not allowing the continued association of the LGBT community with others who have a sincerely held religious belief that the homosexual life style is condemned by the owner’s God as sinful.
    • Can the state legislatures create a law that punishes the rights of a protected class of individuals in order to advance the privileges of a non-protected class over those of that protected class?
    • Do LGBT citizens have more rights than non-LGBT citizens?
    • Do businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone such as those that have no shoes or shirt on, or even for individuals that would drive other customers away or threaten to do so (i.e., a disruptive customer)? Or can the state require the business owner to serve any and everybody that comes into the business store, regardless?
    • If ‘polls’ show that the majority of citizens are for same-sex marriage, then should not the U.S. Constitution protect the minority of citizens that have a religious belief against same-sex marriage?
    • If an LGBT individual comes in to a service store-front and asks for service and the owner of that store must, by government decree, accommodate that LGBT individual in every way, then can government also ‘protect’ the LGBT business owner? That is, if the owner of a service company is an LGBT individual, can the state force a non-LGBT individual to strictly patronize an LGBT owed shop regardless of any competition? Sounds silly but strict and absolute accommodation of LGBT people by a protected class of religious business owners is silly as well.
    • Given: a news reporter is going to be a witness in a trial, that news reporter can be prevented (put ‘under the rule’ by the court) from being in the court room listening and reporting on the testimony of others before that reporter testifies since there are other reporters from the same news organization that can report on the trial’s proceedings in the interim. Likewise, if there is a business in competition with another but will accommodate a LGBT individual where the other store will not, the legislature or court should not require the latter store to accommodate the LGBT individual regardless of the owner’s religious objectionable beliefs toward LGBT people.
    • If an atheist can have a religious symbol (such as a Calvary Cross or a Star of David) taken down out of the atheist’s sight because it offends the senses of that atheist, can a business refuse service to a LGBT individual because the LGBT individual offends the religious senses of the business owner?
    • If the courts demand tolerance of a protect class toward a non-protected class, must not the courts demand tolerance of that non-protected class toward a protected class?

  8. […] powerful brief filed by the firm of William J. Olson, P.C., Attorneys at Law, and the U.S. Justice Foundation cites the late conservative journalist M. Stanton Evans in his book The Theme of Freedom as saying […]

  9. […] powerful brief filed by the firm of William J. Olson, P.C., Attorneys at Law, and the U.S. Justice Foundation cites the late conservative journalist M. Stanton Evans in his book The Theme of Freedom as saying […]

  10. […] powerful brief filed by the firm of William J. Olson, P.C., Attorneys at Law, and the U.S. Justice Foundation cites the late conservative journalist M. Stanton Evans in his book The Theme of Freedom as saying […]

  11. […] powerful brief filed by the firm of William J. Olson, P.C., Attorneys at Law, and the U.S. Justice Foundation cites the late conservative journalist M. Stanton Evans in his book The Theme of Freedom as saying […]

Recent News

© 2020 United States Justice Foundation.