Guest hitoallusa Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 I think he has upheld the constitution so far..??? It's funny but I don't get it... Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted March 22, 2012 Posted March 22, 2012 I think he has upheld the constitution so far..??? It's funny but I don't get it... I'm surprised you don't get it. It has nothing to do with not supporting the constitution, it has everything to do with the fact that he is putting the bible first in every single one of his speeches and potential actions. That's not why we put people in office. Quote
Members JKane Posted March 24, 2012 Members Posted March 24, 2012 I think he has upheld the constitution so far..??? It's funny but I don't get it... Every bit of his pandering mewing about imposing *Christian* values on everybody would be in direct contradiction of the establishment clause of the constitution, if enacted. Quote
AdamSmith Posted March 24, 2012 Posted March 24, 2012 Every bit of his pandering mewing about imposing *Christian* values on everybody would be in direct contradiction of the establishment clause of the constitution, if enacted. Exactly. As is also (slight hijack here, but worth noting over and over) every argument against marriage equality that relies on religious tradition. Quote
Members RA1 Posted March 24, 2012 Members Posted March 24, 2012 That is an interesting question. I have "always" assumed that marriage was a religious ceremony and a civil union was just that. Therefore I have had no problem with civil unions between any two consenting adults. I have had "thoughts" about marriages, however. I am certainly willing to learn. Best regards, RA1 Quote
Members JKane Posted March 24, 2012 Members Posted March 24, 2012 That is an interesting question. I have "always" assumed that marriage was a religious ceremony and a civil union was just that. Therefore I have had no problem with civil unions between any two consenting adults. I have had "thoughts" about marriages, however. I am certainly willing to learn. Best regards, RA1 The problem is this runs right into the establishment clause. Sure, Catholics won't marry a gay couple, but Unitarians, Church of England, etc... would be happy to. I get the idea some Jewish congregations would be happy to as well. Why do a couple of Christian sects get government permission to decide for everybody whether or not they can be married? Especially when there are other Christians backing the opposite! And the other problem is currently we have marriages in some states not recognized in others which is also constitutionally problematic, I believe. But we've been here before with mixed-race couples... Quote
Guest EXPAT Posted March 26, 2012 Posted March 26, 2012 Here is an interesting article refuting Santorum's view on mixing the state and religion like he wants to do. You may get what you asked for. . . http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/ct-perspec-0321-religion-20120321,0,4949641.story Quote
