To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 24932
24931  |  24933
Subject: 
Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 21 Jul 2004 17:16:29 GMT
Viewed: 
1787 times
  
[snip the redundant redundancy]
  
   If the first amendment doesn’t mean exactly what it says and protect all religious beliefs equally, why would we need a constitutional amendment against gay marriage?


If they’re trying to pass an amendment, the 1st Amendment doesn’t apply. It only prohibits laws. Besides, the issue of same-sex marriage may be religiously driven, but outlawing it isn’t either endorsing or prohibiting any specific religion, so it’s not unconstitutional on that basis.

Incorrect, as some churches now support gay marraige, denying them the right to legally marry homosexuals is a violation of their religious freedom.

”We have no right to prejudice another in his civil enjoyments because he is of another church.” --Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Religion, 1776.

”[When] the [Virginia] bill for establishing religious freedom... was finally passed,... a singular proposition proved that its protection of opinion was meant to be universal. Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion, an amendment was proposed, by inserting the word “Jesus Christ,” so that it should read “a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy author of our religion.” The insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend within the mantle of its protection the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo and infidel of every denomination.” --Thomas Jefferson: Autobiography, 1821.

You can find many more on the University of Virginia’s website here. Freedom of Religion is link number 52

-Mike Petrucelli



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
 
(...) Noone is denying them the right to perform private religious ceremonies. They're just being denied the right to enter into a legally binding social contract. (20 years ago, 21-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Santorum Fails In His Effort To Pervert The Constitution
 
(...) Last time I checked Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. They're not allowed to pass laws to prevent religious zealots from flavoring the law with their religious (...) (20 years ago, 21-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)

200 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR