(no subject)
Actually this completely VALIDATES the argument that legalizing Gay Marriage "violates the sanctity of marriage" as Marriage is first, foremost and exclusively a RELIGIOUS institution.
The government making any laws that tell Religious institutions what they should, must or must not believe, teach, allow or support is a violation of their First Amendment rights and protections...
To bring the First Amandment into this discussion, one must realize that it was written for the purpose of preventing the STATE from telling RELIGIONs what they have to believe, NOT to prevent RELIGIONs from telling the STATE what to do...
The argument that freedom of religion according to the First Amendment gives Government the right to define marriage (like so many other misconceptions of what freedom of religion means) seems to espouse that any law that comes from a religiously motivated group of people is necessarily invalid and ought to be disregarded. Whereas, every religious citizen in the country has exactly the same rights and privileges, as any other citizen, to establish the state that they would want to live in.
It is their responsibility to support any and all legislation that they believe would create a better country based on THEIR definition of what "better country" means.
If sanctity by definition is primarily religious in meaning... then it is for the religion in question to decide what is and is not sacred or sanctimonious...
BY definition, laws made by the state have NOTHING to do with something's sanctity as that is exclusively the realm of the religious to declare and decide.
If the Government passed a law declaring that "based on scientific evidence it is heretofore declared that wafers and drink taken during communion is nothing other than plain bread and wine" it would be not only overstepping it's bounds ACCORDING TO THE 1ST AMENDMENT... but it would have no bearing on the fact that it is the Catholic Church's responsibility and exclusive domain to decide whether or not their parishioners should believe that Transubstantiation has taken place. And it is for the believers and proponents of that religion to find sanctity in it... the government should, quite frankly, "buzz off"
The government making any laws that tell Religious institutions what they should, must or must not believe, teach, allow or support is a violation of their First Amendment rights and protections...
To bring the First Amandment into this discussion, one must realize that it was written for the purpose of preventing the STATE from telling RELIGIONs what they have to believe, NOT to prevent RELIGIONs from telling the STATE what to do...
The argument that freedom of religion according to the First Amendment gives Government the right to define marriage (like so many other misconceptions of what freedom of religion means) seems to espouse that any law that comes from a religiously motivated group of people is necessarily invalid and ought to be disregarded. Whereas, every religious citizen in the country has exactly the same rights and privileges, as any other citizen, to establish the state that they would want to live in.
It is their responsibility to support any and all legislation that they believe would create a better country based on THEIR definition of what "better country" means.
If sanctity by definition is primarily religious in meaning... then it is for the religion in question to decide what is and is not sacred or sanctimonious...
BY definition, laws made by the state have NOTHING to do with something's sanctity as that is exclusively the realm of the religious to declare and decide.
If the Government passed a law declaring that "based on scientific evidence it is heretofore declared that wafers and drink taken during communion is nothing other than plain bread and wine" it would be not only overstepping it's bounds ACCORDING TO THE 1ST AMENDMENT... but it would have no bearing on the fact that it is the Catholic Church's responsibility and exclusive domain to decide whether or not their parishioners should believe that Transubstantiation has taken place. And it is for the believers and proponents of that religion to find sanctity in it... the government should, quite frankly, "buzz off"