There are some good points there. I've always maintained that religion is the jurisdiction of those with authority in the religion. But I feel there's no reason to not call it marriage. That's still infringement upon other people because someone doesn't agree with their lifestyle. The key is not compromise. When we're talking civil rights, there is no room for compromise. They're either allowed or they aren't. If a white judge ordered that a black man could eat in a white man's restaurant but had to sit in another section, that would be...well, in fact, that's exactly what happened. Civil rights aren't to be met halfway. They're to be met all the way. There is no logic in partially denying a right because it pisses a lot of people off that haven't brought their feelings into the 21st century yet. Rights aren't about appeasement.
But I will reiterate that I believe Catholic churches, Muslim churches, etc. can decide who gets married in their churches. A religion is like a club...you set your own rules.
The government is not a club.
But I will reiterate that I believe Catholic churches, Muslim churches, etc. can decide who gets married in their churches. A religion is like a club...you set your own rules.
The government is not a club.
Comment