Let’s start with the verbiage here: Marriage, being a religious matter, as far as I’ve EVER know, has always been man/woman.
Let’s not play the lib game ‘how many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg?’...They say 5 and everyone else goes WTF?
I’m saying, if we had a Constitutional gov’t, there would be NO need to recognize ANY marriage, civil union, etc.
It’s amazing how fast gov’t is able to jump on this (ludicrous speed it seems), but try to the same logic for Constitutional carry and boy watch the turtle
If marriage was only about religion then law wouldn’t be involved and atheists would be out of luck, and polygamy and gay marriage would have been legal all along, don’t get silly and start all that childish pretending stuff.
Like libertarians always do, you want to play games of evasion, you are fine with the military treating gay marriage the same as they do actual marriage.
That is why you can’t just answer the obvious question posed, I know the answer, you know the answer, we all know the answer, but you don’t want to say it out loud.
“”Are you saying that your libertarianism supports discriminating against homosexuality by the federal government, for instance, that the military should not recognize a marriage, if it is of homosexuals?””