I’m Catholic and certainly don’t approve of same-sex marriage, but I’m also wise enough to know that not everyone is following my religious path and doctrines. But, aside from my religious beliefs, I’m finding it more and more difficult to understand how the so-called separation of church and state can be applied to subject matter that directly involves one of the three components of American government.
Everyone agrees that we have three branches of Government – the President, the House and Senate (Legislature) and the Supreme Court. The members of that Supreme Court are nominated by the President and voted upon by the Senate. Clearly, those two branches of government play a special role with regard to the Court, and the Court goes about its business, dealing primarily in the constitutionality of various laws passed by the Legislature and signed into law by the President. All three branches with direct involvement with one-another.Marriage, in the context of two people joined together in holy matrimony, regardless of their gender, is – to me, at least – more of a religious matter and, therefore, would be at or near the top of the list of things the government should NOT be involved in. And that includes laws such as the Defense of Marriage Act.If there’s supposed to be a separation of church and state, why is the state involved in marriage in any form or fashion?
i think the state has to get involved if not then those like hate filled evangelical teachings would permeate the country, have we forgotten the reason they left England RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION just like those they fled that exerted such power over them in the name of God, they come here and embark on the same trip they were fleeing.
those founding guys were slave owners that in itself is ignoring the Bible teachings, look at the power that televangelist have over those gullible by need to seek salvation.
i believe those laws were instituted to allow them free reign as their previous leaders had over them, you do what you know.
Somewhere along the line, proponents of same-sex marriage have changed the definition of marriage to something more closely resembling a business-like, contractual “deal”, if you will, and removed the religious connotation from the mix. That started several years ago when individual states authorized civil unions. Most were reluctant to include the word “marriage” to that legislation because to do so would have invoked the very “benefits” they would derive; not to mention the ramifications of religious voters.
that entire paragraph comes off as if the religious of this country however perverted it is in some places is more important then those of say another religion or those who may not believe, they say they don't want the gov't in their bedrooms and other places but feel totally obligated to insert their beliefs in yours.
organized religion is not the religion the Bible speaks of, the same as those holier than thou feel Gay's and others are abominations and only are subject of their discuss, but try putting that shoe on the other foot, looks the same to me
