Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: loboinok
"Finally, Jefferson’s Danbury letter should never be invoked as a stand-alone document."

Whatever happened?

This case is also central to the marriage issue. The Court did declare the legal restrictions for the religious rite of marriage was solely a statutory function in the secular law.

Marriage is not a civil right, it is a privileged religious rite and requires a license to be recognized by the state and federal government.

Since all adults have equal privilege to marry one consenting adult of opposite gender, 14th Amendment arguments concerning "equal privileges and immunities" do not apply to homosexual monogamists.

13 posted on 02/02/2007 6:04:47 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (LET'S ROLL!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Whatever happened?

Overall, I would say the short answer would be... Socialism and the successful effort of the Federal centralization of power.

We've seen it in the 2nd Amendment Miller case, Engel v. Vitale, Roe v. Wade, Lawrence v. Texas, KELO et al. v. CITY OF NEW LONDON, etc.

It's becoming pretty blatant, don't you think?
17 posted on 02/02/2007 10:21:10 PM PST by loboinok (Gun control is hitting what you aim at!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
"Finally, Jefferson’s Danbury letter should never be invoked as a stand-alone document."
Whatever happened?

This case is also central to the marriage issue. The Court did declare the legal restrictions for the religious rite of marriage was solely a statutory function in the secular law.

Marriage is not a civil right, it is a privileged religious rite and requires a license to be recognized by the state and federal government.

Since all adults have equal privilege to marry one consenting adult of opposite gender, 14th Amendment arguments concerning "equal privileges and immunities" do not apply to homosexual monogamists.

If I understand you correctly, one problem with respect to things like marrage laws that arguably don't compliment the constitutional division of federal and state powers is that the Founding Fathers erroneously presumed, in my opinion, that pre-Constitution judges would be able to change their thinking about the law overnight.

Another problem is that Constitution-ignoring, secular-minded judges are taking advantage of epidemic ignorance of both the Constitution and how our government is supposed to work by walking all over our constitutional freedoms, particularly our religious freedoms. This ignorance is evidenced by the following links.

http://tinyurl.com/npt6t
http://tinyurl.com/hehr8

19 posted on 02/05/2007 3:21:24 PM PST by Amendment10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson