What the Supreme Court on Gay Marriage can tell us about ISIS


U.S. foreign policy as it pertains to ISIS should reflect the reality of what ISIS is: a social movement for which the best course for absolute defeat is a “bottom-up” approach, rather than just “top-down”.

On Monday, the Supreme Court gave a shocking decision to not rule on gay marriage decisions in five states. Some could see this as a defeat for gay marriage, prolonging the costs and time it takes to move the process forward state-by-state.

On the other hand, though, most commentators and gay marriage proponents saw this as giving tacit approval to gay marriage by the Court. And in fact, this does seem to be the case. Unlike most other Supreme Court decisions, it doesn’t take a majority for the Court to agree to hear a case–it only takes four votes. This means that at least a super-majority of the justices did not feel the need to provide oversight to the decisions.

And this is important to remember. The Supreme Court is not intended to be a court in the usual sense. It is an appeals court. It oversees the federal appeals courts’ decisions and only acts when they think the appeals courts are either contradicting one another or are going in an extremely wrong direction. In other words, they are there to clarify when there’s ambiguity, not create out of thin air.
Continue reading

a question from a straight white christian male without a voice…

To date, this is the post I am most ashamed of ever having written on this blog. It perpetuates power dynamics and long-held ways of thinking that add to problems and ignore their structures. This post participates in a system of injustice and “not listening”. It’s a profound exercise in missing the point in these issues. I keep it up as a reminder to myself and others of how wrong-headed and dumb I can be. I’m sorry for these words, and I’m grateful for your grace.


I find myself in an awkward time in our current news cycle. As part of the most talked-about news items of late, we have birth-control (and by extension, abortion), racial tensions over the death of Trayvon Martin, gay marriage being approved and some states and vetoed in others, the health care law going before the Supreme Court, and a Philadelphia ban on the public feeding of the homeless.

Is it possible for me, as a (relatively) middle-class white Protestant male, to communicate opinions about these topics if I don’t share the same sentiments as most others?
Continue reading