Actually, the real problem is that the state has meddled in something that it should leave alone. Marriage is within the jurisdiction of the church, not the state. When the state decides marriage, it violates the first amendment.
If, however, we're stuck with a government that is deciding marriage in a secular way (I know, oxymoron) it cannot discriminate based on religious grounds.
I wasn't alive when homosexuality was removed from the list of mental illnesses, but I bet people were probably predicting this runaway slide at that time.
And you believe that all life originated on a rock that was struck by lightning and that a visit to the zoo is a distant family reunion. (I guess that would make owning pets morally equivalent to slavery, eh?)
What's your point?
Yes, unless he's being facetious, I also think Neil's comment is silly.
Plebiscites will forever be powerless to overturn Natural Law. Gay marriage is not marriage, even if someone writes the opposite on a piece of paper and stamps it.
That said, it isn't right of the B & B owner to keep these people away. If a man and woman show up at the desk, does he verify that they are actually married to each other and not in an affair?
It is apparent to all that understand how our monetary system operates that we are all (100%, not 50%) dependent upon government deficit spending or another consumer's deficit spending for us to be free of debt on the individual level.
Come on, Clegg. You're a coward. You meant what you said. At least have the courage of your convictions to stand by your statement, even if it is wrong.
Usually you function at vacuum to verify vacuum performance. Is the rocket properly designed? Can it ignite? Are your performance predictions accurate? Can the hardware survive? Etc...
10/25/12 10:23 PM
