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.
"Finally, Jeffersons Danbury letter should never be invoked as a stand-alone document."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.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.
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