congress shall make no law....respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. would that ruling not be unconstitutional? shouldn’t government get out of the “marriage” business? marriage is a religious thing, is it not? so these civil licenses apply to anyone and they are called unions or something, but a religious service is still a marriage. wouldn’t churches have the right to determine who they will allow to be married under their doctrine? i am asking because i truly wish to know, not just to be a smart ass.
This identity group rights business is the road to tyranny.
We would be better off to start publicly hanging judges. The rule of law means very little anymore...
The founding fathers who wrote the first amendment didn't seem to think so.
marriage is a religious thing, is it not?
Not exclusively. Marriage is a social institution. It predates organized religion. Some religions bless marriages, but there is a social purpose to heterosexual marraige, namely, encouraging stable families with a mother and father, that is entirely seperate from religion.