=z0wb13;7102072]i think you took my point backwards. what i was saying is that up until 1870, christmas was a religious holiday. when the government declared it a federal holiday, then it became secular, because of the establishment clause.
It still is a religious holiday, because the government recognizing it as a religious holiday does not violate the establishment clause, since such recognition is not an establishment of a state church.
sort of. just because marriage started out as a religious obligation doesn’t matter, since it is a federally sanctioned thing now.
Well, you are consistent. If the government usurps something specifically religious, then it is nolonger religious. My complaint is with those who want to exclude from the public square those things religious which they don’t like, but adopt and change those religious things they perceive are important to enhancing government power. I just want it to be consistent; if it is unconstitutional to have a nativity scene on the courthouse lawn, then government interference in marriage is, too.
that’s why denying gays the liberty to marry whomever they want to violates their civil rights. so, individual churches could refuse to marry anybody that they want, like mixed race couples for instance. and that would be under their religious purview. but the judge that actually stamps the marriage license, they have to stamp it for any two adults that aren’t already married.
Why does the judge have the power to stamp the marriage license, if it is a religious act, which historically it is?
and if you want to argue with me, you have to explain how it doesn’t violate the 14th amendment to have two separate classes of citizens.
It is not a violation of the 14th amendment for a church to choose the basis upon which they marry. The issue is does the government, under the establsihment clause have legitimate authority regarding a religious act - to change it as they see fit.
you can’t just say that you find gay sex icky
I wouldn’t. That’s juvenile.
or it that it has always been this way or that way.
Now this I can say, all the way back to Genesis.
and don’t lay any of that old testament jive on me; if jesus has anything to say about the gays, i haven’t seen it, yet.
More importantly, I haven’t seen anything that Jesus said to change the institution of marriage into something new and different.
but i think that’s a fair trade off, people can keep saying “merry christmas” to me, and i will enthusiastically “merry christmas” back, and let’s have the gays get married, too.
I certainly think in our secular society, gays have every right to have a civil union, and acquire the same secular rights as any other couple, but it isn’t marriage.
But along the lines of your thread, should I, as a public school teacher, be allowed the right to wish my 5th grade students “Merry Christmas”?