Trix said: Okay, I'll give you that one...perhaps the government shouldn't really have control of the actual 'union of marriage'...But, we know that it boils down to tax and probate issues...The government, I am sure, wants to keep those things in their court...And for the sake of keeping things legit, so to speak. Otherwise, like someone posted before...who the hell knows what kind of fanatical group will pop up, advocating human/animal, or adult/child marriage unions...It could get really ugly! I say:
Government, put in place by the people, for the people, to govern the people. The government is not SUPPOSED to be a watchdog of any religious practices or endorse any said practices, ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION.
Religion, a private organization that is run by its own rules and guidelines for
THOSE THAT WISH TO PARTICIPATE!
Marriage, is a
RELIGIOUS institution, and the
LAW has NO RIGHT to interfere between a man/woman and their religion, ACCORDING TO THE CONSTITUTION.
THE ONLY reason this is an issue, is because of these reasons:
1) The U.S. government decided to enact a law that allowed the testing of blood of those wishing to be married, under the name of a "marriage license". This was the first "legitimazation of marriage in actual written law. A good idea, started to check the blood of those wishing to marry and have children, trying to prevent disease. But that was an open door to bad decisions.
2) The government then decided it would give "favored citizen" status to those that got married by offering income tax breaks, "to help those that are trying to help build this country." The main reason this gay marriage issue is currently being brought up, which is that if the GOVERNMENT is going to offer FAVORED CITIZEN STATUS to those that married, why should it only be people who can conceive normally, and not those that adopt. If Male/Female families can adopt and get tax breaks, why not man/man or woman/woman couples?
A LEGITIMATE ARGUMENT. WHY ANY FAVORED STATUS IN TAXATION? That is descrimination with OUR MONEY, the taxpayers money!
3) NOW, by letting the government get involved in the "qualifications" for marriage by requiring a marriage license, and offering tax incentives to those with children, they have unwittingly opened themselves up to a boat load of descrimination charges because:
A) If the government does step in and say gay marriage is not permitted, it both goes against the constitution by removing the rights of those who wish equal fairness for raising adopted children under the tax code, and sets the tone that GAYS are not NORMAL, or, should they not be TREATED EQUALLY.
B) If the government says gay marriage IS ok, then they are violating the churchs beliefs and "trying to change the morals of our society" according to the religious zealots, and also they violate the constitution by amending when not necessary, as this is already covered under
ALL MEN BEING EQUAL under the eyes of the law.
WHAT YOU ARE SEEING IS A CATCH-22 CREATED BY THE GOVERNMENT BY PASSING LAWS THAT VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION, AND ARE NOW BEING SCRUTINIZED UNDER THE PUBLIC EYE OVER A STICKY ISSUE.
The explanation is quite simple. At the time the majority of the states being formed under the union of a democratic republic, were believers in God in the form of Christians and Catholics. To say that since that was the way it was then, thats the way it should be now, is ridiculous.
The writers of the Constitution recognized that liberty means something different to everyone, though the essential necessities to provide liberty were the same. If you will read Article 1 of the Bill of Rights you would see how clearly they actually did understand liberty, regarding religion.
Here is Article 1:
"Religious Establishment Prohibited. Freedom of Speech, of the Press, and Right to Petition.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
It is clear that they believed one of the essential items of liberty was freedom of religion, or freedom from religion. "Free exercise" of religion is very vague for a purpose. They felt that enumerating rights too specifically would endanger every right not specified. The point being, without freedom to believe and practice belief in a higher power OF YOUR CHOICE, be it God, Rah, Budda, or whatever YOU the individual so chooses to claim to be your God, you have neither liberty or freedom.
This country when it was founded, had a majority of believers in Christianity such as Catholics,Lutheran,Presbytyrian,Baptist,Mormon,
Mennonites,Amish,etc,etc. Since this was the overwhelming majority, they had no issue with allowing those things you speak of to be built, or the phrase "under God" being in the Pledge of Allegiance. They also condoned using a bible to swear on, and their oath was "under God". THAT DOES NOT MEAN that it is "OK" to ignore the rights of those who embraced and help build this society who happen to be Godless,Athiest,Humanist,Shinto,Muslim,Buddhist,Gaya, or any other by FORCING them to recite ALLEGIANCE TO YOUR GOD! Liberty is essential to all men, for this to be a free society.
This country was founded as a Democratic Republic, which is far from where it is today, unbeknownst to the very people who live here.
In a Democratic Republic, 99% of the people, couldn't take away the rights of 1% of the people. Also our Bill of Rights specified these rights are inalienable. Today those rights are being trampled in all respects by a government that no longer embraces or recognizes true liberty. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were meant to limit the Governments power, not the peoples power. Our Government no longer resembles a Democratic Republic in any way, shape or form. When the very document used to limit the oppression of government, is used to repress the will of the people, you have a situation where the government no longer represents the people. This is where we are today.
Our Federal Government no longer respects the rights of the individual, or the states, as is clear in many issues, especially in Californias attempt to legalize medical marijuana in that state. The Fed has no authority to tell California they can't legalize, yet they do, because they are already sponsoring an UNCONSTITUTIONAL WAR ON DRUGS!
No matter how you color the picture, the picture we see today is not the United States it was intended to be. I will fight to make it the way it was intended to be, which is the land of the free, and the home of the brave,REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOUR PERSONAL BELIEFS, ONE AND ALL.
SUPPORT and ENACT legislation that will review all civil laws, and tax code for infringement of the Constitutions limitations. That is our only chance of making this government do its intended function.
And for those that are still skeptical, I ask you to question the very Pledge of Allegiance you have recited countless times, and ask these questions;
Do you even know and comprehend what "REPUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL." means?
NOTICE HOW THEY STATE REPUBLIC, (FOR WHICH IT STANDS). THAT MEANS THE REPUBLIC AS WRITTEN IN (THE) CONSTITUTION, not some specific individuals interpretation of the Constitution.
Without the Constitution standing unmolested, this government is not official, nor does it have authority, nor has it authorized or issued a document stating that it is independent of our Constitution. That my friend means that we are CURRENTLY under attack by political forces to USURP power FROM THE PEOPLE, as PROMISED in the Constitution.
The words "Under God" were added after a campaign by the "Knights of Columbus" (an organization with religious ties), lobbied to have those words added.
The orginal accepted version is;
"I pledge allegiance to the Flag
of the United States of America
and to the Republic for which it stands,
one nation,
indivisible,
with liberty and justice for all"
Please check the fact here, or other official websites.
http://www.history.vineyard.net/pledge.htm