Ban the consumption of Pork!

[Damocles]

actually, i do advocate that government should stay out of the marriage business and limit itself to civil unions which would be available to two or more consenting adults and would provide the restrictions and benefits now applied to marriages, but would call them civil unions and leave 'marriage' to those organizations that wish to 'marry' people

Almost everybody on the site agrees that would be a good idea. It has been my argument for about 7 years worth of online 'arguments'.

Instead of taking action towards this, we still get only "ban gay marriage" or "sanction gay marriage". Instead of taking more from the government we simply want to give them more power.

It's almost sick how much we want to be controlled.

 

[Don Quixote]

Almost everybody on the site agrees that would be a good idea. It has been my argument for about 7 years worth of online 'arguments'.

Instead of taking action towards this, we still get only "ban gay marriage" or "sanction gay marriage". Instead of taking more from the government we simply want to give them more power.

It's almost sick how much we want to be controlled.

dang!, you should stop posting, you make too much sense

 

[Jarod]

I never said it restricted people from practicing their religion. It abridges their right to freely practice their religious beliefs. There is a difference. Part of the religion is the holy matrimony of men and women, it is the foundation for family in the Christian church, as well as many other religions. By involving the state in sanctioning this particular institution based on attributes not in accordance with these religious beliefs, is an abridgment of their right to maintain the practice in a sanctified manner. Analogies presented are valid... Like if the government said food companies could label pork as "kosher" and sell it. This would contradict the Jewish criteria for what "kosher" means... it doesn't matter that a lot of people might like to buy "kosher pork" and it would help the economy! It doesn't matter that Jews wouldn't be forced to eat the "kosher pork" being sold in every store! It is the fact that it infringes and abridges their right to freely practice their religious beliefs.

It would not infringe the right of Jews, because they would not be required to buy the meat, they would know that to them and for there purposes, just because its called kosher meat, does not mean its what they call kosher.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

It would not infringe the right of Jews, because they would not be required to buy the meat, they would know that to them and for there purposes, just because its called kosher meat, does not mean its what they call kosher.

It doesn't matter that they wouldn't be required to buy the meat. It infringes on their right to freely exercise their religious beliefs, which do not include kosher pork! That would be making a mockery of their religious beliefs and customs, which is not permitted by the 1st Amendment, in my view. You have the personal right to make a mockery of their religious beliefs all day long, but the government has no such right to sanction the mockery.

You seem to think, the 1st only means that government can't prohibit someone from religious beliefs, and if that is the case, you need to read it again. Specifically, the second part, about the "free exercise thereof." I know it's tough for you to grasp the concept because it uses words you are not accustomed to, but it means that government can't pass laws which defile the customs, practices, and traditions of religion. These customs, practices, and traditions are a vital and fundamental part of their "free exercise" of religious belief. To remove or alter these customs, practices, and traditions, is to deny them the constitutional right they are promised by the 1st Amendment.

There are any number of absurd examples we could give, where government could restrict the free exercise of religion, without directly denying a person the right to worship. In fact, there isn't much the government COULD do, to stop people from worshiping whatever they feel like worshiping, is there? I mean, if you want to get technical about it, government could ban the Bible, and close down all churches, but people could still pray to God and worship Jesus, couldn't they? So, the 1st doesn't simply say the government can't prohibit you from worship, because nothing can really prohibit a human from worship, if they so desire. The 1st is a deeper protection than this, it protects the right to "freely exercise" through customs, practices, and traditions. For many religious groups, this includes the institution of marriage between a man and woman.

 

[uscitizen]

dang!, you should stop posting, you make too much sense

Yeah but the party he supports does not.
what can I say though neither party does.
But the demoncrats never claimed to be for smaller govt as I recall.

 

[Jarod]

If the government allows corporations to label pork as kosher, that does not make it kosher. It is not prohibiting the free exersize of anything. Kosher food is certified by a rabbi, not by the government. Just because the govt. allows someone to call food kosher does not mean you have to eat it. Just because the government allows gays to get married and call it a marriage... does not prohibit you from exersizing any religen whatsoever.


Now, some religens promote marriage for people who live together or have sex, even if they are gay, they promote government sanctioned marriage. If you deny these people this are you not prohibiting the free exersize of there religen?