jeebling wrote:I’m all for it. Not to be a downer, but it irks me that the government is involved in any way whatsoever, for any citizen wanting to marry. But I understand.
I’ll take that a step farther by saying government has ABSOLUTELY no business regulating personal relationships at all. Not everyone will agree with everyone else’s choices. But, I’ve always subscribed to the idea that
one person’s rights end where another person’s rights begin.
It’s undeniable that the basis of many morality based laws, or lack thereof, is religion. It is also undeniable that our country was also founded by by strong followers of the Christian faith. Yet, it is equally undeniable that those believers SPECIFICALLY stated:
Quote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
So it would seem any law based on what may or not be covered in the Bible would be a law reflecting an establishment of religion.
As such to allow benefits of marriage to one another a couple composed of a man and a women but to deny those benefits to a same-sex couple is a prima facia example of a) a law based on religion and b) a violation of equal protection.
Doesn’t mean I’ll always agree with everything but it’s what I swore to protect both as a military inductee and as a law enforcement office.