Huh. This is still a thing? Really???

[OldLady]

Because the current trend in America is to deny God Almighty, America is being punished severely and are experiencing disasters and calamities daily. For being heathens and devil worshipers.

Floods, fires, hurricanes, tornadoes, murder, terrorism,etc, etc. Some people aren't paying attention and I get a couple of funnies. Ain't that a blast?

Floods, fires, hurricanes, tornadoes...huh. Those all sound environmental. What's another word for that? Oh yeah...climate. But, let's not go there, right? Let's just call it "God's Will", because that is soooo much more rational.

Are you suggesting that murder is a new thing? And you get that the whole point of terrorism is because one religion doesn't like the way another religion worships the "Magic-Man-in-the-Sky", right? That's not a sign of godlessness. If anything, it's a sign you're doing it right, because the extremists of other religion hates you.

The Great Flood. Gods will.

Mark Twain said, " Such is the human race, often it seems a pity that Noah...didn't miss the boat."

Love Twain.

 

[Czernobog]

What do you think gay marriage is all about? I've said this all along.

Gay marriage is all about collecting the exact same cash and prizes the rest of us get for being married. It has nothing to do with religion.

If you search "cash and prizes" on my username, you will find I have been pointing this out since I arrived on this forum.

That was my point...

I am of the opinion that we need the government to get OUT of ALL our marriages as much as possible.

But if we are going to use our laws to bestow cash and prizes, then the Constitution demands we extend equal protection of those laws to everyone.

Not possible. We will always need laws (government involvement) to regulate things like probate, and authority to represent citizens in medical matters, etc. So government will always have a vested interest in marriage. As such your final statement, which I still think is a rather cynical portrayal of the issue, is correct.

The only reason government has a vested interest in marriage is because it has involved itself in marriage.

Okay, then without "government involvement" (read laws) how would you submit that issues such as inheritance, and child custody be decided in cases of death, or divorce?

 

[g5000]

Gay marriage is all about collecting the exact same cash and prizes the rest of us get for being married. It has nothing to do with religion.

If you search "cash and prizes" on my username, you will find I have been pointing this out since I arrived on this forum.

That was my point...

I am of the opinion that we need the government to get OUT of ALL our marriages as much as possible.

But if we are going to use our laws to bestow cash and prizes, then the Constitution demands we extend equal protection of those laws to everyone.

Not possible. We will always need laws (government involvement) to regulate things like probate, and authority to represent citizens in medical matters, etc. So government will always have a vested interest in marriage. As such your final statement, which I still think is a rather cynical portrayal of the issue, is correct.

The only reason government has a vested interest in marriage is because it has involved itself in marriage.

Okay, then without "government involvement" (read laws) how would you submit that issues such as inheritance, and child custody be decided in cases of death, or divorce?

A contract. And a will.

I am not saying government should be completely out of these matters. But it definitely needs to be a lot less all up in our marriages and our lives.

A LOT less.

 

[Czernobog]

That was my point...

I am of the opinion that we need the government to get OUT of ALL our marriages as much as possible.

But if we are going to use our laws to bestow cash and prizes, then the Constitution demands we extend equal protection of those laws to everyone.

Not possible. We will always need laws (government involvement) to regulate things like probate, and authority to represent citizens in medical matters, etc. So government will always have a vested interest in marriage. As such your final statement, which I still think is a rather cynical portrayal of the issue, is correct.

The only reason government has a vested interest in marriage is because it has involved itself in marriage.

Okay, then without "government involvement" (read laws) how would you submit that issues such as inheritance, and child custody be decided in cases of death, or divorce?

A contract. And a will.

Marriage is not a contract?

The legal union of a couple as spouses. The basic elements of a marriage are: (1) the parties' legal ability to marry each other, (2) mutual consent of the parties, and (3) a marriage contract as required by law.

Be honest. You recognise that marriage is, by definition, a contract. You just take offense that you don't get to keep it religious.

I am not saying government should be completely out of these matters. But it definitely needs to be a lot less all up in our marriages and our lives.

A LOT less.

However, as you pointed out, any involvement of the government requires equal treatment. So, we're right back at the beginning.

 

[whitehall]

What the whiny and angry emotional left consistently fails to understand is that freedom of religion was so important to the Founding Fathers that it was the first issue addressed in the Bill of Rights. The thing we need to remember about the Bill of Rights AKA the 1st 10 Amendments to the Constitution including the 1st Amendment that includes freedom of religion is that it was intended as a restriction on government power. The government has always had a history of bending over backwards to accomodate the religious beliefs of citizens. Even when the Union was desperate for manpower during the Civil War the pacifist Quakers were exempt from service. During the Vietnam war you didn't even have to be a Quaker to be exempted from military service. Mohammed Ali became the most celebrated person exempted from military service on the basis of his Muslem conversion. Uniformed civilian services and even the Military exempts certain religious members from uniform regulations. People can't be forced to work on holidays that have religious significance. Persons who are sworn in as witnesses in court no longer have to swear on the Bible. They can choose the Koran or some agnostic book that they claim is important. Kids don't have to pledge allegiance to the Flag if they are uncomfortable with the word "God". It would be easy for state and local governments to have an agnostic on call to marry persons who want an agnostic wedding and just as easy to find a non religious Clerk to be on call for sodomite weddings. The pretend outrage about sodomite and agnostic weddings is just another of the never ending left wing assaults on the Bill of Rights

 

[Czernobog]

What the whiny and angry emotional left consistently fails to understand is that freedom of religion was so important to the Founding Fathers that it was the first issue addressed in the Bill of Rights.

And what the whiny and angry emotional right doesn't seem to understand is that religious freedom is an individual right and does not extend to government officials refusing to perform their official duties.

It would be easy for state and local governments to have an agnostic on call to marry persons who want an agnostic wedding and just as easy to find a non religious Clerk to be on call for sodomite weddings. The pretend outrage about sodomite and agnostic weddings is just another of the never ending left wing assaults on the Bill of Rights

You're right. It would be. What a shame that none of these backwards counties, in these repressive states seem to be smart enough to think of doing that, and instead continue to inconvenience their residents in the name of their religious oppression.