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

To: Flame Retardant

They can do the wedding ceremony, it just isn’t legally binding. What’s the problem? Religions which recognize polygamy perform their ceremonies, they just aren’t legally binding.

This is bogus, because nobody is preventing them from performing a homosexual ceremony, if their religion allows for that.


5 posted on 04/30/2014 8:18:19 AM PDT by Dilbert San Diego (Im W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Dilbert San Diego

Bingo!


14 posted on 04/30/2014 8:37:12 AM PDT by Pecos (The Chicago Way: Kill the Constitution, one step at a time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Dilbert San Diego
They can do the wedding ceremony, it just isn’t legally binding. What’s the problem? Religions which recognize polygamy perform their ceremonies, they just aren’t legally binding. This is bogus, because nobody is preventing them from performing a homosexual ceremony, if their religion allows for that.

The basis for the lawsuit is a North Carolina statute which makes it a crime for a clergy member to perform a wedding ceremony unless the couple has a state-issued marriage license.

The correct resolution of the lawsuit would be a ruling that it is unconstitutional to apply that statute to clergy who perform a religious wedding ceremony so long as no one is claiming that the marriage is legal. The correct resolution is not to say that the State must recognize as legal any marriage that any clergyman wants to perform.

33 posted on 04/30/2014 11:02:29 AM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | 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