Re: [MLUG - DISCUSSION] southpark speaks the truth

[Michael <EMAIL:PROTECTED>]

>The strict "Judeo-Christian" definition of marriage went out the window
>with the separation of church and state.  The second that justices of
>the peace (judges, etc.) were allowed to perform marriages, the word
>"marriage" was redefined.  The traditional marriage was performed in a
>church, by a priest, minister, etc.  When we allowed justices to perform
>what are essentially state-sanctioned marriages, that half of the
>equation became a matter of law.  No one in their right mind would say
>that if a state decides to allow homosexual marriage that churces in
>that state must perform ceremonies for homosexuals; separation of church
>and state, right?  It's within the rights of the church to decide who
>they will and will not allow to marry.  I just don't understand the
>uproar over this issue.
>  
>
True, but this country has long been held hostage by psuedo-Christians 
(Christian-like morals even if they aren't technically Christians) so 
the sepperation of church and state have become something of a mockery.

>But your group marriage argument is silly.  Marriage (in the civil, not
>religious, sense) has *always* been defined as a union between two
>people, not a group.  In both the religious and civil senses.
>
So? Like the Mormons plenty of groups are interested in group marriages. 
Wouldn't that be religious descrimination to keep them from doing it as 
long as all the  partners are willing participants? If you're going to 
lax the definition to same sex marriage you'll eventually have to lax 
the definition in lots of other ways.
_______________________________________________
discussion mailing list
EMAIL:PROTECTED
http://mlug.missouri.edu/mailman/listinfo/discussion