'@TheChief'
Name one way that non-gay peoples lives are defined or redefined or whatever by gay marriage being legalized.
In fact its the other way around, and its not only the other way around, its a total violation of religious freedom to deny gays legal marriage rights. There are religions, even sects of Christianity that before it was legalized were supportive of gay marriage. And any gay person who was in their own part religious and desired a wedding as recognized by the law like any other, was not allowed by law to be married under their own religious beliefs.
Lacking any actual argument of harm caused by relationships between two consenting adults, there is absolutely nothing to be said against it.
The only violation of liberty, religious or otherwise? Is the violation of defining a universal institution by the beliefs of specific religions and religious people, and not allowing equal treatment under the law of those same people even in cases of secular marriages through justices of the peace...or Vegas chapels.
You started out right in saying that its not against any rules to be influenced by a religion in pushing for things in US government. But of course as I said, you really are for going beyond that and defining law by certain religions. And the state can not recognize laws respecting a religious establishment. No one or even many religions may define the law of the land. Which is exactly what you are calling for and complaining about.
0
'@TheChief'
Name one way that non-gay peoples lives are defined or redefined or whatever by gay marriage being legalized.
In fact its the other way around, and its not only the other way around, its a total violation of religious freedom to deny gays legal marriage rights. There are religions, even sects of Christianity that before it was legalized were supportive of gay marriage. And any gay person who was in their own part religious and desired a wedding as recognized by the law like any other, was not allowed by law to be married under their own religious beliefs.
Lacking any actual argument of harm caused by relationships between two consenting adults, there is absolutely nothing to be said against it.
The only violation of liberty, religious or otherwise? Is the violation of defining a universal institution by the beliefs of specific religions and religious people, and not allowing equal treatment under the law of those same people even in cases of secular marriages through justices of the peace...or Vegas chapels.
You started out right in saying that its not against any rules to be influenced by a religion in pushing for things in US government. But of course as I said, you really are for going beyond that and defining law by certain religions. And the state can not recognize laws respecting a religious establishment. No one or even many religions may define the law of the land. Which is exactly what you are calling for and complaining about.