The other options are so ridiculous I can't believe people come up with those. Well, about 50% of them people actually come up with. =-=;;
A consequence that no one brings up though, is that any same-sex marriage law introduced never provides for the first amendment right to freedom of religion. :/
Lolol, reading through the comments, I feel like a minority here. Though considering where I live, that's actually not a surprise. .____.''
I'm not sure I understand where the conflict with freedom of religion comes in?
ETA
Oh, unless your referring to a churches right to refuse to marry a same sex couple. But I believe that it is standard that a priest/church can refuse to marry anyone including a male/female couple.
There really shouldn't be. =-=;; Imo, same-sex couples ought to do their thing and churches ought to do theirs. But there were a few [2? 3? well, definitely 1] cases in the Bay Area [CA] where a same-sex couple were denied a marriage ceremony in a local church and sued.
Then I look at Sweden [which has legalized same-sex marriage without provisions to protect church's rights], where a pastor was jailed for "hate speech," for preaching on Leviticus 18:22. And his sermon was nowhere near as offensive as Westboro Baptist [who were deemed to be exercising their 1st Amendment rights]. And we know how much we wish those people would just crawl in a hole somewhere and disappear.....
Hehehh. Lots of run-on sentences there. Point is, it sounds like common sense, to let each side do their thing, but darned if there aren't always people thinking they can make a political statement for their rights by trying to take someone else's away. =-=;;
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
A consequence that no one brings up though, is that any same-sex marriage law introduced never provides for the first amendment right to freedom of religion. :/
Lolol, reading through the comments, I feel like a minority here. Though considering where I live, that's actually not a surprise. .____.''
no subject
ETA
Oh, unless your referring to a churches right to refuse to marry a same sex couple. But I believe that it is standard that a priest/church can refuse to marry anyone including a male/female couple.
no subject
Then I look at Sweden [which has legalized same-sex marriage without provisions to protect church's rights], where a pastor was jailed for "hate speech," for preaching on Leviticus 18:22. And his sermon was nowhere near as offensive as Westboro Baptist [who were deemed to be exercising their 1st Amendment rights]. And we know how much we wish those people would just crawl in a hole somewhere and disappear.....
Hehehh. Lots of run-on sentences there. Point is, it sounds like common sense, to let each side do their thing, but darned if there aren't always people thinking they can make a political statement for their rights by trying to take someone else's away. =-=;;