In the wake of yesterday's hearings in the Supreme Court, one constitutional law expert is convinced a decision favoring same-sex "marriage" won't sit well with the American people. Another says it dangerous that the high court is even trying to interpret the Constitution on marriage.
What they said: Supreme Court quotes from arguments
Mat Staver of Liberty Counsel has told OneNewsNow previously there's no right to same-sex marriage in the Constitution – and if the court creates one, it will be a lawless decision that won't deserve credence. He believes states will respond by essentially saying: "Thanks for your opinion. We don't agree with it. It's certainly outside of the Constitution and what you say doesn't make it constitutional."
Translation: Some states will defy the court through passive resistance. Staver continues:
"I think you'll also find resistance from individuals who will say: If we're in the adoption ministry, we're going to continue to do adoptions by putting children in homes with moms and dads. We're not going to voluntarily cease our mission. We're not going to discontinue our photography mission or [as a] baker or florist. We're going to resist."
The Liberty Counsel founder also believes the passive resistance will "swell up around the country" and people will lose respect for the court, which he says "does not have the right to micro-manage all these major social experiments in our country."
Read: Christian leaders threaten civil disobedience if SCOTUS legalizes gay marriage (FoxNews.com)
Religious freedom also in the balance
Attorney Brad Dacus, president of Pacific Justice Institute, says it's important that the U.S. not fall into the trap of other countries by legalizing homosexual marriage.
"Also it's a test of whether ... this court is going to become an activist court filled with judicial activism and not restraining itself to the original intent of the function of the court," he tells OneNewsNow. "I think frankly Justice [Antonin] Scalia said it well when he said the question is who should be deciding this point: the courts or the people and the state legislatures – and we hope it's going to be the latter."
The attorney also suggests American citizens will find out with the final ruling if they're going to have constitutionally protected religious freedom.
"For the courts to be intervening in this – reading something in the Constitution that's not there – shows also a potential total disrespect for the right of Americans to have institutions that are reflective of their values and their beliefs without the government and the courts intervening and telling the contrary," he concludes.
The Supreme Court's decision is expected to be announced by the end of June, if not sooner.