Register to leave a comment, or log in if you already have an account
I’m not here to offer you entertainment. Just know that the vast majority of Americans, thankfully oppose gay marriage; it loses by huge majorities every time it’s put to a vote, and I’m hoping and praying that we don’t go the way of Western Europe and go there.
Legion, no one cares if a particular religion sanctifies a marriage or not. This is a legal civil definition for marriage.
The religions can like it or not, no one really cares much about that. there will certainly be those religions locked deep in the Dark Ages that will never accept it…Islam, Chriatian right, etc.
That’s different from a civil ceremony.
People with religious views can express them but separation of church and stae (part of the Original constitution, prevents them from being argumentative.
Fair point, tybur at 5.55.
Don’t ahve a dog in this fight but it seems to me as if in a lot of these cases the judges decide what they want to do first and find the legal way of arguing it later.
wow, this is too heavy a topic to open up at this late
an hour,
but I disagree with brooklyncouch’s assertion that
heterosexual couples are better at raising children,
there are way too many examples of bad hetero parenting to count.
if the argument is based on religious objections, then you’ve hit an impasse and a vote is the only way to a solution on this issue.
…is it the term “marriage” as a religious institution, this is the problem or is a civil union acceptable in your view?
oh – and etson, it’s not “gay marriage” that was decided to be unconstitutional or not. It was the provisions of Prop 8. It violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.
I’m not here to offer you entertainment. Just know that the vast majority of Americans, thankfully oppose gay marriage; it loses by huge majorities every time it’s put to a vote, and I’m hoping and praying that we don’t go the way of Western Europe and go there.
Legion, no one cares if a particular religion sanctifies a marriage or not. This is a legal civil definition for marriage.
The religions can like it or not, no one really cares much about that. there will certainly be those religions locked deep in the Dark Ages that will never accept it…Islam, Chriatian right, etc.
That’s different from a civil ceremony.
People with religious views can express them but separation of church and stae (part of the Original constitution, prevents them from being argumentative.
Fair point, tybur at 5.55.
Don’t ahve a dog in this fight but it seems to me as if in a lot of these cases the judges decide what they want to do first and find the legal way of arguing it later.
There’s no constitutional amendment allowing miscegenation.
Here’s from a female friend of mine…sums it all up. Brooklyncouch won’t be pleased to hear that they have 2 lovely adopted daughters either…
***
“We are CELEBRATING tonight. Yup. Thai food with my wife…we’ll try SUPER hard not to threaten the sanctity of marriage.”
wow, this is too heavy a topic to open up at this late
an hour,
but I disagree with brooklyncouch’s assertion that
heterosexual couples are better at raising children,
there are way too many examples of bad hetero parenting to count.
if the argument is based on religious objections, then you’ve hit an impasse and a vote is the only way to a solution on this issue.
…is it the term “marriage” as a religious institution, this is the problem or is a civil union acceptable in your view?
Not the same thing at all, Snappy, as those changes were executed by explicit amendments to the constitution.
oh – and etson, it’s not “gay marriage” that was decided to be unconstitutional or not. It was the provisions of Prop 8. It violated the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses.
oops, “”I find” the idea…”