CDZ Big Government And Big Church Are Now The Same Thing

[surada]

Who determines the rules of engagement in the dissolution of the "contract"?

Who determines the division of property in any dispute?

Who determines child custody?

You're blowing it all out your ass, yet again.

The couple has to agree on the terms of the dissolution. The state doesn't care. They just don't want to raise the kids. Ask a lawyer.

 

[martybegan]

No problem, just as soon as the same acceptance of concealed carry permits are offered universally.

You wouldn't get any pushback from me on that.

 

[Oddball]

The couple has to agree on the terms of the dissolution. The state doesn't care. They just don't want to raise the kids. Ask a lawyer.

The State, through its divorce courts, runs the whole show.

Just admit that you were lying about your legal education....It's beyond evident that you haven't the first idea of what you're talking about.

 

[Oddball]

As is with the topic of this thread. You have clearly pointed to its premise.

The United States is founded upon natural human rights, and no religious doctrine. And as such, no religious doctrine ever be cited, or adhered to in any sense, or in any way by law, court ruling, or dictate in regards to the individual liberties of its citizens.

Your religious beliefs regardless of any issue, be it gay marriage, abortion, education, or anything else, has any weight or bearing on what any citizen may do.

As in getting married, having an abortion, or any other action regarding natural human rights.

In short, religion is irrelevant in the United States, and the only place it has any legitimacy at all, is your natural human right to practice it.

What you don’t have, is any right in that practice to effect the lives of others.

"I'm butthurt" isn't an argument.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Pish posh.

End licensing and return marriage to the realm of common law.

Good old 1760

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You wouldn't get any pushback from me on that.

Same. I wish all gun humpers would concealed carry.

 

[surada]

The State, through its divorce courts, runs the whole show.

Just admit that you were lying about your legal education....It's beyond evident that you haven't the first idea of what you're talking about.

Nope. I am certified in civil litigation from a top ABA approved school. The state doesn't care. The issues in dissolution are custody, support for minor children, division of property and conduct of the parties. If the two parties agree on terms, the state rubber stamps it.

 

[Oddball]

Nope. I am certified in civil litigation from a top ABA approved school. The state doesn't care. The issues in dissolution are custody, support for minor children, division of property and conduct of the parties. If the two parties agree on terms, the state rubber stamps it.

I think you're lying.

 

[surada]

I think you're lying.

Ask a lawyer if the state is party to the marriage contract.

 

[Oddball]

Ask a lawyer if the state is party to the marriage contract.

Already did, like I told you twice now....You haven't the first fiucking idea of what you're blabbering about, and I believe you're lying out your ass about your supposed legal credentials.

 

[surada]

Already did, like I told you twice now....You haven't the first fiucking idea of what you're blabbering about, and I believe you're lying out your ass about your supposed legal credentials.

N

Already did, like I told you twice now....You haven't the first fiucking idea of what you're blabbering about, and I believe you're lying out your ass about your supposed legal credentials.

Nope. I didn't like working in a law office so I was hired as director of strategic planning for the 800 pound gorilla because I was real good with complicated contracts and negotiations. I also did a lot on the side with medical malpractice both prosecution and defense. You're like Trump. You know everything so you can't learn.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Our ancestors escaped Europe to set up shop over here for that very reason. Is another 1776 moment needed again, to retake individual liberty, that is being eroded under the guise of religious freedom?

Christo-fascism is at war with individual liberty; and Christo-fascism is winning.

 

[bodecea]

Our ancestors escaped Europe to set up shop over here for that very reason. Is another 1776 moment needed again, to retake individual liberty, that is being eroded under the guise of religious freedom?

Actually, that is historically inaccurate. For example, the Puritans came to FORCE their idea of religion on everyone they could.

 

[bodecea]

Christo-fascism is at war with individual liberty; and Christo-fascism is winning.

They'll turn on each other.................heck, they already have in some cases.

 

[surada]

Already did, like I told you twice now....You haven't the first fiucking idea of what you're blabbering about, and I believe you're lying out your ass about your supposed legal credentials.

Now you're just lying. Too late for you to learn anything.

 

[Blues Man]

But

A Church shouldn’t be forced to Marry someone of the Same Sex unless they are willing to do it…

The left would have it where a Church would be forced to do the ceremony or face State sanctions against it but then make sure a Mosque is not held to the same standard.

So let be clear the left is after a certain segment of society and the OP is known for his hate for anything right of them and is well documented in telling the board he want war…

No marriage performed by any religious institution should be recognized by the government.

The government should only recognize civil marriages because as far as the government is concerned marriage is nothing but a property contract and the government should not be giving the clergy of any religion any powers to validate anything for the state.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Legislation, and court rulings over the last 40 years, on issues ranging from abortion, employee rights, tax payer funding of religious organizations, and schools, etc.

The list is quite extensive with just the simplest of research efforts. The latest Supreme Court decision just bubbling to the surface.

You do realize it wasn't until the 20th century that any of these "rights" existed. There were no Constitutional abortion "rights" prior to 1973. There were no employee "rights" prior to the 1930s. Publicly funded education wasn't nearly as accessible prior to the 20th century. Things are actually more free today than they were when this country was founded. We've evolved quite a bit in a more liberal direction since that time, so I'm not really sure what your point is. The church has always influenced government since our founding. This is hardly anything new.

 

[surada]

No marriage performed by any religious institution should be recognized by the government.

The government should only recognize civil marriages because as far as the government is concerned marriage is nothing but a property contract and the government should not be giving the clergy of any religion any powers to validate anything for the state.

When you are married in church the marriage contract is also registered with the state.

 

[Blues Man]

When you are married in church the marriage contract is also registered with the state.

The Church should not be performing any functions for the government that includes marriage.

The state should only recognize a marriage presided over by either a government employee, a judge, a town clerk, or a JP registered with the state.

 

[surada]

The Church should not be performing any functions for the government that includes marriage.

The state should only recognize a marriage presided over by either a government employee, a judge, a town clerk, or a JP registered with the state.

You should check the law as to who can officiate.