RadiomanATL
Senior Member
Yeah. So I guess you're against all the various Bible belt states' having adopted those gay marriage bans?
Damn skippy. It's none of the governments business. I say the government should get out of the business of "marriage" altogether and go strictly with the term "civil unions". Since it seems that the bible thumpers main objection is actual use of the word "marriage". That should shut them up. The church marries, the government just recognizes civil unions for the purposes of the tax code.
Not quite the answer you were expecting, was it?
Well, since I elicited a more reasoned argument from my oppponent when I asked the question, your point has long since been moot.
Thats fine. But the point was not wrong.
Civil union would be fine. The problem and the fear of the so-called bible thumpers is the government would then declare it a violation of human rights to refuse to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples.
Which is a violation of everything our constitution stands for...namely, that the state cannot dictate religion.
Huh?
That wouldn't be a violation of civil rights, even if the terminology did not change.
Churches can refuse to marry man-woman relationships now. Your post is a non-sequitor.