[Christian_Capitalist]

Except that 37 our of 50 states (44 out of 57 for Barack Obama) didn't join anything. They were admitted, and only with the permission of a majority of the other states as expressed through a vote in both houses of Congress. Why shouldn't leaving require the same?

That's crazy.

My wife and I both had to sit for Membership examinations with the Eldership of our church prior to being admitted into communicant voting membership.

Should we so desire, however, we can freely leave the church at any time.

The fact that a voluntary club practices limited admission does not in any way imply that the club has a right to put a gun to the head of dissatisfied members to force them to stay. Or do you think that churches should have the right to threaten their parishioners with violence if they decide to take their worship elsewhere?

[Non-Sequitur]

Should we so desire, however, we can freely leave the church at any time.

You don't see just a little bit of difference between the Constitution and your church?

The fact that a voluntary club practices limited admission does not in any way imply that the club has a right to put a gun to the head of dissatisfied members to force them to stay

If permission is required to join why shouldn't leaving be the same?

Or do you think that churches should have the right to threaten their parishioners with violence if they decide to take their worship elsewhere?

A very poor analogy. For a more accurate one how about a business contract? Would it not make sense for the protection of all members of the partnership to prevent one member from unilaterally breaking the agreement?

[hirn_man]

“My wife and I both had to sit for Membership examinations with the Eldership of our church prior to being admitted into communicant voting membership.

Should we so desire, however, we can freely leave the church at any time.”

If however when you leave you decide to take a few pews and maybe the altar, the other members just might try to stop you.