I rather think Thomas Jefferson would disagree with this article.

OOh!  We are SO scary!

Typical.  Liberals are against civil disobedience except when they do it.

Wow. As soon as I encountered “declaration” in scare quotes I knew I was in new territory. There was a time not so long ago (15 years or so) when I worked in Los Angeles and often read the LA Times over a solitary lunch. They were on the left/liberal side in those days, but nothing like this. The entire editorial consists of a manifesto for gay rights and abortion-at-will, in tones not less extreme than the most strident of gay activists. It is easy to see what faction has taken over the editorial room of the Los Angeles Times.

The editorial offers no logical justification whatsoever for distinguishing between the possible civil disobedience of the signers of the declaration and Dr King’s civil disobedience, other than simply asserting that they are different.

In what way did Dr King by his actions not “forfeit the authority to intervene in the enactment of those laws” that he was protesting as unjust, laws that could just as easily been characterized by regnant racists as laws that the civil rights leadership simply “didn’t like”?  And why is a right answer to that question not equally applicable to the Christian leaders who signed the declaration?

What utter rubbish.  There is an intellectual infantilism here (“because I said so!”) that should embarrass any thoughtful progressive or “liberal” who reads it.

“But under no circumstances will we render to Caesar what is God’s.”

Strong words, but also irresponsible and dangerous ones.

That’s just what Caesar thought as well.  Hence the lions.

No one can force a church or a cleric to bless a “same sex marriage” - that is until the expected civil rights lawsuit. 
No one can force a church to grant same sex benefits - that is until the expected civil rights lawsuit.
No one can force a church to enable adoption to same sex couples - that is until the church or church agency is sued by one or by the state.
No one can force a church to cover elective abortions in its health care plan for employees - that is until the state requires it and the courts agree.
No one can force a church run hospital to perform abortions - that is until having the facitlities and training for such is part of the licensing requirements authored by the state and the hospitals are no longer licensed. 

Our religious freedoms are no longer guaranteed by the Constitution.  They are only guaranteed by a majority of five people on the US Supreme Court.

I fear that a lot of good work will not be done because the State requires active engagement with evil (as defined by the religious organization) to perform its works of mercy.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

The LA Times as the new “Bull Connor”.