NYcarbineer
Diamond Member
- Mar 10, 2009
- 117,063
- 13,888
Gay Americans now have the legal constitutional right to marriage equality, thus making it an illegal act of discrimination to deny them that right, but,
Kim Davis and others are claiming that since their disagreement with the establishment of that right is a religious disagreement,
they are entitled to a special status, a right of their own to be above the law.
BUT...
and this is to those who agree with Davis et al,
an atheist, for example, whose personal belief might also be that gays should not have that right, cannot make a legal claim to the same special status,
despite having exactly the same opinion as Davis and all who claim their opinion is religion.
How can the exact same opinion (or more precisely, actions on that opinion) be legal in one case and illegal in another, simply because of where the person claims the opinion comes from?
Kim Davis and others are claiming that since their disagreement with the establishment of that right is a religious disagreement,
they are entitled to a special status, a right of their own to be above the law.
BUT...
and this is to those who agree with Davis et al,
an atheist, for example, whose personal belief might also be that gays should not have that right, cannot make a legal claim to the same special status,
despite having exactly the same opinion as Davis and all who claim their opinion is religion.
How can the exact same opinion (or more precisely, actions on that opinion) be legal in one case and illegal in another, simply because of where the person claims the opinion comes from?