By David M. Drucker, The Washington Examiner.
Carmen Fowler LaBerge
Carmen Fowler LaBerge practically predicted the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing same-sex marriage in all 50 states.
Back in September, the religious liberty activist and leader of the Presbyterian Lay Committee said bluntly that social conservatives were losing the debate over marriage to advocates of government-sanctioned same-sex unions. On Monday, the Washington Examiner reconnected with Fowler LaBerge to get her thoughts on the Supreme Court ruling and what comes next for Americans unhappy with the outcome.
Her message to them: It’s going to get a whole lot worse, possibly for years, before it gets better. Fowler LaBerge, married to husband Jim LaBerge since 2011, lives near Nashville.
Examiner: You said when we last talked that your side was losing the debate. Are you surprised that, less than a year later, same sex marriage is the law of the land?
Fowler LaBerge: What surprises me is maybe not even the Supreme Court’s ruling but the level of social, political celebration, as if it was an overwhelming majority of the court. Seeing the White House used as a piece of propaganda as if this is now universally understood as our public policy, that is probably what surprises me the most, the willingness of huge sectors of the media and the population to be fully coopted by one side of the conversation.
Examiner: What did you think of the legal reasoning the majority used in reaching its decision?
Fowler LaBerge: The reasoning given now opens the possibility of those who are interested in polygamous or poly-amorous marriage. There is nothing in the decision that would now prevent the argument being made that polygamous or poly-amorous relationships ought not also be available to all citizens of the United States.
12 Comments. Leave new
This is just such baloney. First the Bible describes plural marriage for David and Solomon so it is biblically endorsed. But the dissents were extremes that were inflamic and not real scenarios.
But even still, so we have same sex marriage, and maybe (but not really) polygamy. It effects you conservatives not at all. Really.
I guess conservatives always need a devil to rage against—-and raise money on.
This has nothing to do about raising money, it has to do with what people believe the Bible says about marriage, with that said you don’t know your Bible that well, God DID NOT endorse plural marriage, God allowed it BIG difference.
Just to respond to your point concerning polygamy and polyamory, what would you be willing to bet someone hasn’t already applied for a three-way marriage license? And if they do, then what about the Supreme Court’s decision tells you that, at least after further litigation, polygamy couldn’t be the law of the land? What would be the difference, in terms of constitutional rights, between two people and three people? Would three spouses hurt society, or their children? Not in terms of Christianity, but in terms of psychology or sociology. In fact, people of the same sex have never been allowed to marry in this country, before now. There have been instances of polygamy. On what basis would the Supreme Court decide not to allow polygamy?
In fact, I completed my comment, above, went to the news, and found that a Montana man has just applied for a marriage license for his second wife, with whom he has been living for years. While still married to, and living with, his first. Apparently, state laws tend to be written to criminalize having a second marriage license, while still being married pursuant to the first, not the act of being married to one wife, and also living with a second, without being legally married to her. How long will that stand up? It’s okay to do that, but not marry the second wife? On what basis? For what policy reason?
Just because someone applied for a license doesn’t mean they will get it. Even so, what business is it of yours? This isn’t happening. But go and raise some money to prevent it.
Why would I raise money to prevent it, when you’ve assured me that it won’t happen. You clearly know more about it than the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He thinks it could. Maybe you should call him. He’ll feel better once he’s heard from you.
… and the results of such marriages did not turn out well.
You are very strange, James.
We clearly heard both sides of the arguements. We discerned that the often angry and frightened voices attempting to use the bible as excuses for their hatred and bigoted predudices in the name of God, what a shame, they were simply wrong. They were on the wrong side of justice and understanding as they always have been. This same group or their ilk, stood against women’s rights, both secular and within the church body. Recognize that gay is not just a state of mind or adopted behavior. It’s nature and presumably God’s work. Now, why does it matter? Before you point to scripture, you better take a closer look at how out of compliance you are. Mind your own business, love and forgive and don’t judge like Jesus said and let God deal with God’s business. Amen
Man up, Carmen,
There is something unwell with the faith of believers who assault their congregations and the general public with fear mongering.
It’s the old “there goes the neighborhood” mentality.
It is precisely from this and all other kinds of fear that Christ has set us free. Our forebears in the Faith were not afraid of being fed to the lions in the arena. But apparently, from listening to you, we in 21st Century America should be afraid of our own freedom.
Fear, like a virus, spreads, and like a cancer, grows. But every time a messenger from God ever spoke to a human being, the first word that came out of their mouth was “Do not be afraid”.
The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself.
“The Bible describes plural marriage for David and Solomon so it is biblically endorsed.”
“Only (the king) must not acquire many horses for himself or cause the people to return to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, since the LORD has said to you, ‘You shall never return that way again.’ And he shall not acquire many wives for himself, lest his heart turn away, nor shall he acquire for himself excessive silver and gold.” (Dt. 4.16-17)
“The saying is trustworthy: If anyone aspires to the office of overseer, he desires a noble task. Therefore an overseer must be…the husband of one wife. … Let deacons each be the husband of one wife.” (I Tim. 3.1-2,12)
“Appoint elders in every town as I directed you—if anyone is…the husband of one wife.” (Tit. 1.5-6)
Please read the Scriptures in context. The Bible nowhere endorses David’s or Solomon’s polygamy, II Samuel 12.8 notwithstanding.
Robert, are you writing satire?!….are you actually serious?!…so…you are evidently saying that all those times people studied the scripture and discerned previously, and voted to uphold thousands of years old standards of Biblical authority in earlier votings…they were just “ilk”….only now are people so enlightened and educated that they have finally seen what justice really is. Gee wiz, I bet you are hoot to live with, dripping condescending arrogance out the wazoo like that! And Robert, what we are and what controls us is indeed a choice….you are I make thousands of them every day….what will control me…this day, this minute, this second?…will it be greed, hate, envy, desire for my neighbor or their goods, sexual immorality of all types, etc.? or will it be the good things of the Spirit, that we want to be controlling us? We are doing nobody any favors by telling them they are puppets, controlled by every thought or desire they have. There are an infinite number of unacceptable behaviors and desires that are part of our “nature” that we certainly don’t want to be controlling us and are not part of “God’s work” (you could pretty well use that rationalization for anything, couldn’t you, Robert?) And Robert, if you don’t believe we are called as believers to ‘judge’ other believers (the church), you have evidently missed a large section of scripture…Paul’s writings in particular. Man alive, what you wrote sounds silly!