When government promotes that which contradicts the teachings of your church in public venues that is by definition anti-religious dogma. Whether you feel trampled upon or not is inconsequential to the fact that the government has decided to promote, in direct contravention, that which your church teaches is a sinful act.
Further, it has nothing to do with having a religion or not having religion. It has to do with government teaching your children in public school that Heather having two Daddy's is the moral equivalent of Heather having a Mommy and Daddy. Being a Catholic, I know that violates Catholic Dogma.
There was an interest case in New Hampshire where a college professor was sued for discrimination for stating in class as an example of a similie that "a belly dancer is like jello on a vibrator." He won with the argument that the First Amendment grants us the right to free speech; it does not grant us the right to not be offended.
A shame the courts waste time on moronic cases. And I don't claim a right not to be offended. I do claim the the "establishment" clause of the First Amendment requires neutrality from the government vis a vis secularism and religion.
Ultimately, this argument smacks in both directions of the P.C. Police telling us what we can and cannot say or do.
Garbage, every American has the same rights and privileges. What the judiciary has done is to confer special rights on certain persons totally dependent on their engaging in homosexual acts. If not, then every "marriage" should be available to all and I can marry my grandkids so they have access to my Social Security Survivors benefits and inheritance rights without the tax man taking his share.
Whatever happened to the America that embraced the patriot who said "I may not agree with what you say, but I will fight to the death for your right to say it."
You can say any damn thing you please whether it offends or not.
By the way, you addressed not one point I made in the previous post so I'm not holding out much hope for this one either.
I concur, we did not bring this argument to life. But why the "mores of European Societies." Many families left Europe because of the European mores, including those which dictated which religion what proper and which was not. Given the current mores in Western Europe, particularly France, I see little to be gained from such a following.
I am not for gay marriage. I am not against gay marriage. I simply feel that this issue is getting too much air time and is taking time away from other issues far more important, such as the war against terrorism. Government acquiescence to equating same sex marriage to heterosexual marriage necessarily means that public policy will not be able to take a neutral position vis a vis religion in the public square.
There will be a time to argue this issue. but not now. My point here is that I believe this election is far more important than gay marriage. I can even see discussing it to a point. But what I am seeing on both sides of the aisle is an attempt by both parties--both being prodded by the media--to make this the pivotal issue in this election. And I firmly believe there are more important issues. My family has been and will be taught that the act of homosexuality is a sin while the government publicly proclaims it is a transcendent liberty right deserving of respect.
My family was taught the same thing. My family also taught tolerance to those who are different from our family. I will continue to teach this to my children. My children are young (13, 11, 8,7) and are very fond of pointing out the faults of their siblings, while ignoring their own foibles.
I have on several occasions pointed to the passages in the Bible that say "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." I also like "Take the plank out of your own eye..."
I do not write this accuse you of fault or misdeed. I am trying to teach my children to be good people, to police their own actions first and foremost, and not to worry about what others may do.
I think the government needs to do the same thing. Stay out of the issue. Ignore it. Let it die a natural death. If we teach our children the values we were taught, we have nothing to fear from what others do. There is tension there and the government promotion of anti religious dogma can not be reconciled with the neutrality demanded by the First Amendment. Like Canada and Europe it won't be long after Goodridge, if it is allowed to stand, that the Bible will become hate speech and the preaching of the Bible will demand criminal sanction
Again, these are slippery slope arguments. Show me the connection. Show me the steps. Another problem with a slippery slope is that it is too easy. What are the steps in between? You are arguing that a court ruling in Massachusetts allowing gay marriage will lead to the Bible being outlawed.
There is no logic in that, period. Only chaos theory supports it.
The fact is that according to Catholic teaching, a gay couple can attend mass and receive holy communion as long as they remain celibate.