But the only reason to legislate a behavior is because it is considered morally wrong, what would be the purpose otherwise?
1) Is it 'wrong' to have sex outside marriage with another consenting adult? Should it be illegal?
2) Is it wrong to have sex with children, consenting or otherwise? Should it be illegal?
While both are strictly matters of opinion, #1 is NOT wrong to enough people that the rest of us need to simply tolerate the behavior. #2, on the other hand IS wrong in the eyes of a vast majority and therefore is worthy of legislation with a punitive response to the crime.
This thread started with "In God We Trust" being affirmed in Congress as a national motto.
Since I do NOT trust in "God" - does that make me some sort of second class citizen? Should it?
The opinion of the majority can not be allowed to run over the lifestyle of the minority to appease a religious opinion, no matter how widely held that opinion is, provided there is no other compelling reason for the legislation.
Please remember that this thread started in response to an act of congress affirming a national motto that many Americans consider a joke, and a joke in poor taste at that.
And where is that happening? That was my question?
As far as "In God We Trust", why should the minority be appeased and the majority offended? Why is that okay? If it's not okay for a minority to be offended, then it definitely follows that it would be even more wrong for the majority to be offended.
Let me put it this way... I could live with a change to "In God Some of Us Trust". At least then it wouldn't be blatant bullshit.
That said, what's wrong with leaving all references to God out of our national identity? Remain religion neutral, as it were.