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

To: cc2k
You're not about to address the analogy, are you?
52 posted on 07/19/2003 9:53:34 AM PDT by tdadams
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: tdadams
You're not about to address the analogy, are you?
I'm sorry. I see no analogy.

Your hypothetical law prohibiting bah mitzvahs is a blatantly unconstitutional law against one particular religious ritual that is performed by members of one particular religion.

Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. The state confers certain rights and privileges on such a union. If you want those rights and privileges, find someone you can form such a union with and you will qualify for those rights and privileges. There is no requirement for people to get married. Many people live their entire lives and don't get married. You don't have a "right" to a marriage. If you wish to have a marriage, the rules and requirements are quite simple. If you don't want to follow those rules and requirements, don't get married. What's so hard about that?

An analogy to this would be if we had a law protecting Muslims and Catholics and other non-Jews that said that everyone is eligible for a bah mitzvah, and they don't have to observe any part of the Jewish faith to have a bah mitzvah and to get all the privileges and benefits that go with a bah mitzvah.

56 posted on 07/19/2003 10:26:57 AM PDT by cc2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | 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