(WND)—A new analysis at SCOTUSBLOG, which monitors all things Supreme Court, reports and comments on them, has confirmed that there’s a new “invigorated” campaign to overturn the Supreme Court’s politicized creation of same-sex marriage for the entire nation.

The leftists on the court at that time, several who since departed, simply subverted the democratic process in America, through which such changes in practice would be developed through the electoral process, and mandated that everyone accept the extremist agenda.

ADVERTISEMENT

The results have been damaging for those who declined to change their religious beliefs to conform to the agenda pushed by the likes of then-Supreme Court justice Ruth Ginsberg.

In Colorado, for example, state officials repeatedly have attacked Christians, a baker, web designer and counselor, for refusing to give up their Christian faith and adopt the anti-Christian beliefs. The Supreme Court has struck down that state agenda on First Amendment grounds, but those are not the only cases where refusing to promote the LGBT agenda has resulted in real harm to individuals. A bookstore and a maker of athletic clothing are the latest to be coerced by Colorado to change their beliefs, and are fighting back in court.

Now the online analysis confirms that that issues remain complicated, but “an invigorated anti-Obergefell campaign is under way.”

Obergefell was the label of the case the five justices on the Supreme Court used to impose same-sex marriage, over the protests of the four-justice dissent which pointed out that the Constitution doesn’t mention marriage, and such disputes should be left to states.

In fact, the analysis noted that “certain powers, such as marital arrangements,” long have been left to the states.

One court case mounted an attack on Obergefell and provided a stage from which the justices could have ruled, the Kim Davis case, a county official who was personally attacked and punished by same-sex duos in the days immediately after the Obergefell decision which mandated actions that, at that time, remained illegal under state laws.

The Supreme Court declined to take up those arguments.

The analysis pointed out that support for the ideology is plummeting.

“According to a recent Gallup poll, support for same-sex marriage fell from a high of 71% in 2022 and 2023 to 65% today. This has primarily been a result of falling public opinion among Republicans, a majority of whom supported same-sex marriage in 2021 and 2022 (at 55%), but now only 37% of whom do,” it noted.

Other statements have appeared, with the Southern Baptist Convention voting to urge the high court to reverse the ruling, and Liberty Counsel, a public policy organization, hoping the Supreme Court should “overturn this egregious opinion from 2015.”

Then activists are represented by MassResistance, a grassroots group that urges state lawmakers to move against Obergefell.

The analysis said, “According to Heather Scott (an Idaho Republican state representative), ‘We need to continue to put pressure on [the court] to override [Obergefell]. Our [state] Constitution is very clear: we only recognize marriage between a man and a woman.’”

The result is that state lawmakers in Idaho, Michigan, Montana, Oklahoma, North Dakota and South Dakota have proposed exactly that wording.

An additional argument now also is being made to protect children.

“The Greater Than ‘protect children’ campaign, for example, is a coalition of 47 conservative organizations dedicated to stopping same-sex marriage. According to them: ‘Children are greater than equal. And it’s time we fought for their rights,’” the report said.

Simply, the campaign argues that the children’s need for male and female parents takes priority over the demands of same-sex duos.

“Earlier this year, Katy Faust, president and founder of Them Before Us, echoed this theme at the National Conservatism Conference. The title of her remarks was ‘How Obergefell Commodified Children,’” the report said.

Further advocates for a reversal include the influential Heritage Foundation, the founder of Hobby Lobby, and even Solicitor General D. John Sauer who has said, “out of deference to the States as separate sovereigns in our system of federalism, this Court should be reluctant to intrude into areas of traditional state concern, especially the law of marriage and domestic relations.”

Even some justices on the high court have expressed concern about the manipulation accomplished by the Obergefell ruling.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh has said such changes are better done through Congress and Justice Clarence Thomas is a supporter of a review of all of the court’s “substantive due process” decisions, of which Obergefell is one.

* * *

Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact licensing@wndnewscenter.org.

This article was originally published by the WND News Center.