Opposite. She can base her stance on what she wants as long as she doesn't violate the constitution. And since the constitution doesn't define marriage, she's free to have what ever beliefs she wants.

She is telling the guy, she uses the bible to define marriage. The guys tells her to use the constitution , in which there is no definition. So, why being effectively snarky, he as in effect off the mark. Ii was a cute snip, but off base, hence meh.

 

-----signature-----

Yeah, we're talking two different things.

 

-----signature-----

The constitution says equal protection under the law is important. It doesn't say what marriage is but it does tend to suggest you have to have a good reason for discriminating against some people who want to get married, and "teh bible says so!" is clearly not a good reason, legally speaking.


You are wrong about pretty much everything you have said in this thread.

We already discriminate in desicions on marriage. I'm not linking the saying the bible says it's ok. But it's what we do. We have lots of rules in our laws about who can and cannot get married...all of which are considered constitutional.

edit. Marriage between man and woman has always been a good reason...though we are moving away from that now.

 

-----signature-----

 

-----signature-----

Now you go from dense and stupid to a constitutional lawyer.

What a crock. The constitution forbids discrimination. The only place that people like her (and you) can point to that makes this supposedly not applicable is the idea that the bible says same sex preference is evil and therefore it's ok to discriminate against someone because of who they want to sleep with.

You pretend that this is not addressed in the Constitution. False.
You pretend the bible's teachings allow discrimination because the constitution doesn't address that particular issue. False.

The Senator is free to her opinion. The Constitution supersedes her opinion. And yours.

I repeat.

The Church and State are separate for a reason.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

-----signature-----

Unless they are "fixt" first.

 

-----signature-----

Given that marriage impacts ownership of property, taxes, inheritance, power of attorney, etc, the government does need to be involved.

And if government isn't involved, how do atheists get married? I suppose many Christians hate atheists more than gays so this may not be the best question.

 

-----signature-----

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

AMENDMENT XIV

Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868.

Note: Article I, section 2, of the Constitution was modified by section 2 of the 14th amendment.

Section 1.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Section 2.
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice-President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age,* and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

Section 3.
No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice-President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Section 4.
The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Section 5.
The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

 

-----signature-----

If gay people want to get married they are free to find partners of the opposite sex and marry them. Marriage is between a man and a woman. Gay people should come up with their own term for it.

 

-----signature-----