As opposed to states tramping on the Constitutional right of freedom of worship of those whose religious tenets allowed for same-sex nuptials.Another example of the feds trampling on the state. Feds are out of control, nothing new in that department.
As opposed to states tramping on the Constitutional right of freedom of worship of those whose religious tenets allowed for same-sex nuptials.
Obviously we are on different frequencies on this topic. I would never associate same-sex nuptials with worship, but then again, it depends on just what is being worshiped. And this is exactly why there will never be harmony on this issue.
Great news! It's ridiculous we persecute people still for who they are any can't change. People can disagree with it all they want and like or dislike anyone for any reason, but when you start denying them basic human rights to equality it's persecution and discrimination. I see this issue just like women's suffrage and equality for minorities . No one should have more rights, just equal rights. I'm ashamed our govt treats people unfairly. I promise we will get you equality one day!
Both the state AND the State need to be out of the business of marriage all together.
-J-
cool! I don't like the .gov telling me what guns I can own so I cant imagine how it must feel to have them tell you who you can or cannot marry.
This is kinda my point. For some, their religious practice allows marriage to encompass same sex marriage, but the government's legal strictures trample on the rights of people of those faith traditions. Which one needs to yield? The religious tenets of a free people, or the regulatory laws of the state? Rewriting the marriage statutes, should such be deemed necessary, would not be a pronouncement on the religious tenets of those whose faith only allows for one-man/one-woman. It would just be a pronouncement that the government will not be establishing that the one-man/one-woman faith traditions be the only religions allowed.Okay, let's get the facts straight.
Gays are not denied legal marriage because they are gay. They are denied legal marriage because marriage is defined as the legal contract between a man and a woman. A gay can still marry. It just has to be someone of the opposite sex. If gays were denied legal marriage because they were gay, they wouldn't be able to marry anyone at any time.
This loosy-goosey language is really bugging me.
That said, the conflation of marriage with the secular spousal contract created by the state is also a big fat red herring.