Posted on 09/04/2015 7:37:31 AM PDT by formerRepublicant
We never sleep...
“It implies that obedience to divine law is somehow baked in to one’s constitutional duties and obligations.”
It more than “implies” it. It demands it.
I don't believe there is a Fed law on homo marriage, only that they recognize it for purposes of benefits.
SCOTUS only struck down state laws that do not recognize homo marriage thereby nullifying them and leaving them without any authority to recognize any marriage at all. So in this case Davis is completely correct in what she is doing.
To be clear, I don't believe the Fed has any Constitutional authority what so ever in this and in my opinion it is strictly a State issue, KY should tell the Feds to go pound sand.
I'd like to see it, maybe I'll have a few for them to add in case they missed them.
I keep nothing in bits and bytes.
What happened to darwing104 and 50mm?
Are they no longer doing the kitty list?
Oops, meant to include you guys...
Been busy from what I understand.
Understand, thanks!
My smert debice does that every now and then, decides to “correct” things on me to the point it drops what I’ve pasted or typed.
Posting from phones is a real challenge.
As far as the feds are concerned, it isn’t - nor is it in my home state of Washington. That said, busting marijuana smokers is simply a poor allocation of resources - that’s why more states are looking at legalization. The other thing that legalization does is encourage local production, eliminating the incentive to smuggle.
I don’t want to get in a big argument over gay marriage, but basically what the SC said was this was an equal protection issue.
If the legislature passes a marriage law that she does not agree with in her religious conviction, then she'll have to decide what to do at that point.
I still would love to see KY tell the SCOTUS to eff off and mind their own business.
Aggravating, irritating, and often rage inducing.
"John Dewey described Humanism as our "common faith." Julian Huxley called it "Religion without Revelation." The first Humanist Manifesto spoke openly of Humanism as a religion. Many other Humanists could be cited who have acknowledged that Humanism is a religion. In fact, claiming that Humanism was "the new religion" was trendy for at least 100 years, perhaps beginning in 1875 with the publication of The Religion of Humanity by Octavius Brooks Frothingham (1822-1895), son of the distinguished Unitarian clergyman, Nathaniel Langdon Frothingham (1793-1870), pastor of the First Unitarian Church of Boston, 1815-1850. In the 1950's, Humanists sought and obtained tax-exempt status as religious organizations. Even the Supreme Court of the United States spoke in 1961 of Secular Humanism as a religion. It was a struggle to get atheism accepted as a religion, but it happened. From 1962-1980 this was not a controversial issue.
http://vftonline.org/Patriarchy/definitions/humanism_religion.htm
Hehe...I always thought those were Disgronifiers...
You and the author both forgot:
Article 6 of the US Constitution: NO RELIGIOUS TEST SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC OFFICE.
First amendment states that congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion NOR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.