So, as I understand it, the Supreme Court is deciding whether or not states can define marriage as between one man and one woman.
That means it's possible that they could rule than you can't define marriage that way.
Have we gone completely mad?
4 comments:
Mark 12:17
And Jesus answering said unto them, Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's. And they marveled at him.
Contract law and tax benefits are Caesar's.
Holy matrimony is God's.
People of faith should be strong enough that their religious beliefs and traditions are not defined by the state.
Yeah, I'm not too worried about it. The HHS mandate changed everything for me. It's just that it's kind of crazy to think that we're so unmoored from reality that we can't differentiate between the relationship that creates all life and other ones.
LOL.
Definitions matter.
I could care less about someones sexuality, until they find a way to attack everyone else with it.
Gay marriage is a redefinition meant to impose beliefs upon others. It is Sharia Law for the left.
So the Constitution talks about "We The People" doing things "for ourselves and our posterity". Doesn't that mean that treating us differently based on whether or not we are participating in the creation of "our posterity" is Constitutional?
I know, I'm thinking logically, not "fairly" (the current Newspeak term of the left for what they want, with no actual meaning related to whether something is or is not just).
Post a Comment