A florist in Washington just lost in the state trial court. Some denominations, such as Quakers, will conduct a religious blessing for a same-sex couple. They involve all sorts of religious practices, usually from non-mainstream religions, small minority-group religions.
Catholics do not allow same-sex relationships, as they believe that marriage and sexual relationships should take place between a man and a woman. They wanted to make clear that it also covered litigation against the government, because there's this issue of sovereign immunity, that you generally cannot sue a state.
DM: I'm not familiar with that Kansas case. The court said there was a compelling interest in nondiscrimination.
An example of a denomination that is against same-sex relationships is Catholicism. Not only are people of faith more vocal about their support for marriage equality, but they are, at times, willing to contradict official church doctrine to express those views. Writing on the Conversationsociologist Andrew Jakubowicz from the University of Technology, Sydney, said migrant communities in the west had little information directly available from sources they would trust, or to which they have easy access.
According to them, "a marriage amendment in the Constitution [raises] important church-state and religious liberty concerns. Native American religions traditionally accepted same-sex marriage.
This is generally interpreted to mean that Christians should show love and compassion to homosexuals, but that homosexuals should not engage in sexual activity. The teachings found on same-sex marriage in the Bible describe the act as immoral and "detestable", stating that homosexuals should be "put to death".
DM: Are there other aspects of the law same sex marriage is about equality not religion christianity in Hialeah you think are being misreported or misinterpreted?
The key to the Hobby Lobby case is that it was owned by one family, and they were unanimous about the religious commitments of the business. It was ultimately decided on the grounds that RFRA just didn't apply to a suit by a private citizen, but they rejected every other argument she made, and it was perfectly clear they would have found a compelling government interest if they had gone to the next step.
So if a law is generally applicable, it can be applied even to a worship service, and the state has no duty to justify that or show a need or a reason for that.