Ministers Will Not Be Excluded From Marriage Neutering

An apparent marriage neutering advocate has tipped her hand. Over and over again in the debate over neutering marriage, we have been told that removing the bride+groom requirement from state marriage licensing would not lead to a loss of religious freedom; would not lead any minister being forced to perform a same-sex ceremony.

While analyzing a Los Angeles Times article on the protestant denomination PCUSA for my namesake blog, I came across this statement from an apparent advocate of neutering marriage (not a marriage defender):

"More and more ministers are going to be put in a position where their church members are going to come to them asking for a wedding, and they're going to have to say yes," said the Rev. Beverly Brewster, Spahr's [church trial] defense attorney. "Not to do so would violate many constitutional provisions about non-discrimination in pastoral care."

As with education, marriage neutering advocates often try to deny the consequences of neutering marriage, or use slight of word or misdirection to deflect the concerns of those who are wary of marriage neutering. The marriage neutering advocates want churches and schools to treat SSM the same as marriage, and they will use the force of law to make sure they do. But most of them know that if too many people figure that out, they will actively oppose the neutering of marriage. For now, they focus on "let these couples do what they want" in an effort to force the rest of us to go along. If we do, then they'll use their new tool like a sledgehammer.

UPDATE: Reconsidering this, the quote may be referring to the church constitution, and not the Constitution of the United States, as I originally thought. The article should be more clear. It wouldn't surprise me if the person quoted means both.