|
|
|
| Authored by: kawabago on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 03:14 AM EDT |
Communities tend to burn witches at the stake. I'll take a
judge thanks.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Ian Al on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 03:24 AM EDT |
Civil marriage is a feature of most parts of the world. The marriage is
reflected in other freedoms offered by the law and the system of government such
as taxation and rights of attorney.
The civil law often permits religious ceremonies to form marriages under the
law. The religions concerned include Christianity, Judaism, and Islam.
The civil recognition of marriage is a secular issue and not a religious one,
even if the government is religious rather than secular as is the case in the UK
(IIRC).
The religious oppression that encouraged the formation of the United States of
America also lead to a secular state. The laws of marriage are, therefore, a
secular matter. As is the case around the world, Christian, Jewish and Islamic
marriages are accepted as valid marriages under the secular law.
The Constitution is founded on the secular state, but the Founding Fathers were
committed Christians. I find Scalia's comments un-Constitutional.
---
Regards
Ian Al
Software Patents: It's the disclosed functions in the patent, stupid![ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- Civil marriage - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 05:33 AM EDT
- Civil marriage - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 09:00 AM EDT
- Civil marriage - Authored by: Wol on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 06:34 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 04:13 AM EDT |
Perhaps in your perfect world (and I agree with you to this extent
if I have correctly read you) our highest judges should be amoral,
and impose only the rule of law.
But when the judges are selected on merit, the selection will be colored
by the moral attributes deemed worthy by the selector. Decisions from
such a colored bench will reflect the moral expectations of the selector.
Fun Fact: The Establishment Clause confines Congress, not the judiciary.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: PJ on Monday, June 24 2013 @ 06:05 PM EDT |
It's not about that from the standpoint of
the government. The government has an
interest, traditionally, in protecting
children and for that reason has always
had rules about marriage with that goal
in mind, as well as protecting women from
abuse, financially. It's still fairly
recently that women went out of the home
to work en masse.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
