drsmith1072
Senior Member
- Jul 30, 2009
- 6,031
- 250
- 48
Only in your hypothetical scenario does the restaurant use month old meat in the first place, however.
That's where the difference comes in on abortion, however. You think it's only a matter of when, whereas others would see it as a matter of if.
Marriage is a religious ceremony, the only part the government has to play is in defending the marriage contract. If the private religion wants to decide that two men or two women can get married then that's fine, all the government has to do is defend the contract that comes up. If the private religion decides that only a man and a woman can get married then the government's role remains the same.
Actually businesses have been known to lie to their customers on in the past and have been fine with it UNTIL they got caught.
A couple of examples are mcdonalds lying about using 100% vegetable oil in their fryers when in fact they added beef broth to them to add flavor and another example is food lion a few years back got caught processing old hamburger meat and adding it to breakfast sausage and then reselling it as fresh. So to believe that a business would do that as if it is only a hypoctheitcal when it has happened is beyond naive.
Abortion: righties argue that it is a life at conception and yet it doesn't count as a citizen and have actual rights until it is born in this country. Any moron who argues that someone not born in this country does not qualify for the inalienable human rights protected by our constitution should see that it should also apply to anything not yet born.
Marriage: it is a religious ceremony and the government has no right to interfere in religion and that includes defining marriage. Furthermore based on the FACT that it is a religious institution how does anyone have the right to strip that religious freedom from anyone willing to engage in it?? If a private religion wishes to marry two individual no matter their sex what right does the government have to deny them their religious freedom?? You present half of the argument and then ignore the other side of the coin that parallels your own defense of marriage.
I don't believe that the government should recognize any religious institution. However if you want to go that way then you come to the 14th amendment which provides equal protection and for the government to recognize one marriage and not another is discrimination and unconstitutional
For most of history, marriage has been a contract to consolidate wealth or power. Tell the truth now. Lying is unbecoming.
Uh what are you talking about?? I stated my beliefs on marriage and i know the history of it but what does that have to do with anything that I have said and how am I lying?? Did you even read what I wrote?