Gay marriage is still banned in the Navajo nation

A "holy union" is a religious connotation; and as such, can be banned by religions. But in the U.S., which is not a theology, nor claims an official religion, but does sanction and license marriage, has no choice, as bound by the U.S. Constitution, to treat same sex marriage exactly the same as it treats traditional marriage.

On Indian land, not bound by the U.S. Constitution, they are free to do whatever they want.
show us where in the constitution it states what you contend
 
Marriage is a man and a woman, despite the proclivities of today's tyrants.

Nope. Words have meaning even if you don't know what that meaning is ...

marriage

the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage <same-sex marriage> b: the mutual relation of married persons : wedlock c: the institution whereby individuals are joined in a marriage
 
then show us where in the constitution it states that

Legal marriage is governed by law. And the law must be instituted equally to all...

Amendment XIV

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
 

Well... firstly the term "marriage" comes from the 1200s-1300s.

This came from the French, marier (to marry) which came from Latin, maritare...

"In a 1955 article in Man, Leach argued that no one definition of marriage applied to all cultures. He offered a list of ten rights associated with marriage, including sexual monopoly and rights with respect to children, with specific rights differing across cultures. "

And none of them include the term "religion". Religion was a power base in the past, and a lot of these would have been religious marriages, however that doesn't necessarily mean all marriages were religious.

Marriage has been so many different things over the course of History, to suggest it's ONLY a religious affair would almost certainly be wrong. To suggest that civil marriages have never existed before a certain date in the near past would also be wrong.


"According to the book The History of Human Marriage, in the early Christian era, marriage was considered a private matter not regulated by the church or the state. In fact, the church didn't fully take over the business of marriage until 1563 at the Council of Trent. Religion and marriage, in the context of history, seem to be newlyweds. "

So, even within Christianity it's most likely that religious marriages are a "new thing".
So there was a term for marriage back in the Roman times, a very religious society, yeah that’s not very modern at all, thanks for proving my point
 
Last edited:
So there was a term for marriage back in the Roman times, a very religious society, yeah that’s not very modern at all, thanks for proving my point

How on EARTH did you come up with that? That's like 1 + 1 = 11

Just because a society is religious, doesn't mean marriage was religious.


"Marriage in ancient Rome (conubium) was a fundamental institution of society and was used by Romans primarily as a tool for interfamilial alliances."

"under Roman law, a Roman citizen, whether male or female, could have only one spouse at a time."

Under ROMAN LAW. Under under their religion. It was regulated by THE STATE

"Manus marriage was an institutionally unequal relationship. By the time of Julius Caesar, it was largely abandoned in favor of "free" marriage,"

"when a wife moved into her husband's home, she remained under her father's lawful authority, but she did not conduct her daily life under his direct scrutiny,[20] and her husband had no legal power over her.[21] This was one of the factors in the independence Roman women enjoyed, relative to many other ancient cultures and up to the modern period"

Also I posted a text that showed in the west marriage wasn't religious before the 1500s
 
How on EARTH did you come up with that? That's like 1 + 1 = 11

Just because a society is religious, doesn't mean marriage was religious.


"Marriage in ancient Rome (conubium) was a fundamental institution of society and was used by Romans primarily as a tool for interfamilial alliances."

"under Roman law, a Roman citizen, whether male or female, could have only one spouse at a time."

Under ROMAN LAW. Under under their religion. It was regulated by THE STATE

"Manus marriage was an institutionally unequal relationship. By the time of Julius Caesar, it was largely abandoned in favor of "free" marriage,"

"when a wife moved into her husband's home, she remained under her father's lawful authority, but she did not conduct her daily life under his direct scrutiny,[20] and her husband had no legal power over her.[21] This was one of the factors in the independence Roman women enjoyed, relative to many other ancient cultures and up to the modern period"

Also I posted a text that showed in the west marriage wasn't religious before the 1500s
You admit Roman society was a religious society and your own reference material says that marriage was integral to that religious society. Maybe if you read what you wrote and referenced and understood it you would not ask such stupid questions. Secular marriage is a modern day phenomenon, for most of human history it was closely associated with religious beliefs. Good try but no cigar. You are just wrong, but hopefully you are able to learn from your mistakes
 
You admit Roman society was a religious society and your own reference material says that marriage was integral to that religious society. Maybe if you read what you wrote and referenced and understood it you would not ask such stupid questions. Secular marriage is a modern day phenomenon, for most of human history it was closely associated with religious beliefs. Good try but no cigar. You are just wrong, but hopefully you are able to learn from your mistakes

Oh my word. I can't be bothered.
 
Legal marriage is governed by law. And the law must be instituted equally to all...

Amendment XIV
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
Marriage is a man and a woman. The government does not define words whose meaning was established by society and culture for a thousand years.
 
Marriage is a man and a woman. The government does not define words whose meaning was established by society and culture for a thousand years.

Nope, marriage is what the law says marriage is. And you don't get to redefine it. And yes, the government drafts laws in this country in accordance with the Constitution and the law says a marriage between two people of the same sex is a legal marriage.
 
A "holy union" is a religious connotation; and as such, can be banned by religions. But in the U.S., which is not a theology, nor claims an official religion, but does sanction and license marriage, has no choice, as bound by the U.S. Constitution, to treat same sex marriage exactly the same as it treats traditional marriage.

On Indian land, not bound by the U.S. Constitution, they are free to do whatever they want.
Perhaps you can become an Indian and turn them into queers. You can then live happily ever after.
 
Marriage used to be about religion, for the most part. Then those cucks let the government get involved. Now it is nothing more than a civil union, where people get free shit.
The religious did it to themselves.
 

Forum List

Back
Top